Dismissed

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi, v. The District Collect

Telangana HC25 Oct 2013WP/29391/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge court dismissed a writ petition filed to set aside proceedings regarding the issuance and subsequent revocation of a family member certificate under Sainik Welfare Board rules. The court held that such procedures are not governed by legislation, and disputes over death benefits sharing are private civil matters inappropriate for public law remedy under Article 226.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; interim relief application disposed of as infructuous.

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi, Vs The District Collect — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29391 of 2013

¶2

Date: 25.10.2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi and another

¶5

.. Petitioners and .. Respondents

¶6

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam and others

¶7

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Challa Ajay Kumar Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 6: --

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside proceedings in Rc.No.341/2011/A, dated Nil.04.2013 of respondent No.3.

¶10

Petitioner No.1 pleaded that she was legally wedded to one Apparao following the divorce obtained by her husband from his first wife Smt. M.Saraswathi, vide judgment dated 28.02.1991 in O.P.No.66 of 1991. After the death of the said Apparao, petitioner No.1 approached respondent No.3 for issue of family member certificate. Accordingly, such a certificate was issued by respondent No.3 on 09.12.2011 showing the petitioners and respondent Nos.5 and 6 as the family members of late Apparao. On a complaint made by respondent Nos.5 and 6, wherein they have disputed the status of the petitioners as the family members of late Apparao, respondent No.3 has set aside the said family member certificate and requested the District Sainik Welfare Board, Visakhapatnam, to stop payment of death benefits of the deceased Apparao to the petitioners.

¶11

In their affidavit, the petitioners have not indicated as to whether respondent No.3 has exercised any statutory power while issuing the family member certificate. Such certificates are obviously insisted for confirmation of the family members’ status of the claimants for receiving the death benefits of the deceased employees. As this function is not governed by any legislation, any dispute arising thereof is not amenable to the public law remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As the dispute between the petitioners on the one side and respondent Nos.5 and 6 on the other is purely a private dispute over sharing of the death benefits of the deceased employee, the appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to approach the competent civil court for claiming appropriate relief. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition for adjudication on merits.

¶12

The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners as indicated above.

¶13

As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.36498 of 2013 filed by the petitioners for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶14

_____________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶15

25^th October, 2013

¶16

GHN

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi, v. The District Collect

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Junjuru Varalakshmi, v. The District Collect

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Mazheruddin s/o Mohd. Zahooruddin Vs Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission

Blessmen Welfare Out-Sourcing Society, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

N.Srinivas Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Damacherla Purnanand , Purnaiah, Vs Damacherla Srujana

Doppalapudi Vajramma Vs The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh

Matampalli Sri Rama Sarma Vs Maddela Koteswara rAo