Dismissed¶36

Jannath Beerthosh v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chennai Bench

Madras HC5 Jun 2025WP(MD)/15260/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court Madurai Bench; W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025; family pension; daughter of second wife; deceased postal employee Sheik Jamaludeen; postal pensioner; PPO POSTAL/2015/TN/23111/RP-25971/leg 1; Central Administrative Tribunal Chennai Bench; O.A.No.310/01056/2024; order dated 14.02.2024; required documents not furnished; letter dated 30.05.2024; Department of Posts; Article 226; writ of certiorarified mandamus; writ dismissed; no costs; S.M.Subramaniam J.; A.D.Maria Clete J.; 05.06.2025.

What did the court decide?

Where an applicant seeking the benefit of family pension has not herself produced the required documents for consideration, it is unnecessary for the Court to look into the issue relating to eligibility or otherwise. ¶31

Jannath Beerthosh Vs Central Administrative Tribunal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the daughter of the second wife of the deceased Postal Department employee is eligible for family pension, to be verified by the competent authority with reference to the applicable pension rules. +1 more

¶30

Court's answer

¶31

Ratio / Principle

At the first instance, a person seeking the benefit of family pension is expected to submit all the required documents before the competent authority for consideration and to take a decision on merits and in accordance with law; whether the daughter of the second wife is eligible is itself to be verified by the competent authority with reference to the pension rules applicable.

¶30

Key takeaways

The Court finds no infirmity in the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision directing the writ petitioner to submit all required documents stated in its letter dated 30.05.2024, and requiring the respondents, upon receipt, to process the application in accordance with the applicable rules.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition under Article 226 (W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 05.06.2025 by S.M.Subramaniam and Dr.A.D.Maria Clete, JJ.) challenged the oral order dated 14.02.2024 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in O.A.No.310/01056/2024, seeking a direction to grant 50% family pension to the petitioner, daughter of the second wife of Sheik Jamaludeen, a deceased postal pensioner (PPO No. POSTAL/2015/TN/23111/RP-25971/leg 1; Old PPO No. 4101/LPS). The Court held that since the petitioner herself had not furnished the documents required for considering her family pension application, the question of her eligibility need not be examined; an applicant must first submit all required documents before the competent authority for a decision on merits in accordance with law, and eligibility is to be verified by the competent authority with reference to the applicable pension rules. Finding no infirmity in the Tribunal's direction to submit the documents listed in its letter dated 30.05.2024 and for the respondents to process the application thereafter per applicable rules, the Court dismissed the writ petition; connected W.M.P.(MD) No.11532 of 2025 closed; no costs.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶6

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD) No.11532 of 2025

¶8

Jannath Beerthosh ... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

Central Administrative Tribunal Chennai Bench, Rep by its Registrar, Additional City Court Buildings, 1st and 2nd Floor, High Court Campus, Chennai 104.

¶11

Union of India,

¶12

Rep by its Assistant Accounts Officer (Pension), O/o. General Manager (PA and F), Tamil Nadu Circle, Department of Posts, No. 7, Ethiraj Salai, Chennai - 8.

¶13

3. Union of India,

¶14

Rep by its the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Kovilpatti Division, Department of Posts, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District 628 501.

¶15

1/6

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025

¶18

The Head Post Master, O/o. the Post Officer, Sankarankovil Head Post Office, Tenkasi District 627 756.

¶19

... Respondents

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned Oral order dated 14.02.2024 made in O.A.No. 310/01056/2024 by the 1st respondent Tribunal and set aside the same and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to grant 50 percentage of family pension to the petitioner from the date of death of her father Sheik Jamaludeen, who was a postal pensioner vide in PPO. No. POSTAL/2015/TN/23111/RP-25971/leg 1 (Old PPO. No. 4101/LPS) within time frame may be fixed by this Court.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.V. Muthuvelan,

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.K.Govinda Rajan (R2 to R4) Deputy Solicitor General of India

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]

¶25

Under assail is the order passed by the Central Administrative

¶26

Tribunal, Chennai Bench, dated 14.02.2024 in O.A.No.310/01056/2024.

¶27

2/6

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025

¶30

2.The writ petitioner was unsuccessful before the Central Administrative Tribunal in securing the relief of family pension. Admittedly, the writ petitioner is the daughter of the second wife of the deceased employee, who served in the Postal Department. Therefore, whether the daughter of the second wife is eligible in the present case or not itself is to be verified by the competent authority with reference to the pension rules applicable.

¶31

3.However, in the present case, the Central Administrative Tribunal found that the petitioner has not even furnished the documents required for the purpose of considering the application submitted by the petitioner seeking family pension. When the petitioner herself has not produced the required documents for consideration, it is unnecessary for this Court to look into the issue relating to eligibility or otherwise. Therefore, at the first instance, a person seeking the benefit of family pension is expected to submit all the required documents before the competent authority for consideration and to take a decision on merits and in accordance with law. The Central Administrative Tribunal also has directed the writ petitioner to submit all the required documents as

¶32

3/6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025

¶35

stated in letter dated 30.05.2024 and after receiving the same, the respondents shall process the application in accordance with the rules applicable. This being the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, this Court do not find any infirmity.

¶36

4.Thus, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order

¶37

as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No

¶39

¶40

4/6

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

W.P(MD)No.15260 of 2025

¶43

¶44

The Central Administrative Tribunal Chennai Bench, Rep by its Registrar, Additional City Court Buildings, 1st and 2nd Floor, High Court Campus, Chennai 104.

¶45

Union of India, Rep by its Assistant Accounts Officer (Pension), O/o. General Manager (PA and F), Tamil Nadu Circle, Department of Posts, No. 7, Ethiraj Salai, Chennai - 8.

¶46

Union of India, Rep by its the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Kovilpatti Division, Department of Posts, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District 628 501.

¶47