Partly allowed

Smt.Shaik , Patan Seema Sulthana v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

Telangana HC5 Mar 2020WP/3408/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ seeking declaration that death benefit disbursement to her stepmother was illegal and sought compassionate appointment. An accompanying Section 151 petition sought a stay on such disbursement. The court disposed of the writ without prejudice to merits, directing the Commissioner of Police to consider the representation and pass reasoned orders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed 2nd respondent to consider petitioner's representation and provide benefits after enquiry, passing reasoned orders within six weeks.

Smt.Shaik , Patan Seema Sulthana Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COU-RT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA r,, v,1'r'. (Speciat originat uurisdictiJn]'

¶2

THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF N/ARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITI o N NO: 3408 oF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

1 Smt.Shaik @ Patan Seema Surthana, D/o Mansoor Ari, w/o Nagur r,4eera Aged 28 vears, occ. Unemproye_e/Househord nro n.r.ro'slz-ie+,'l,iriir-,,"il"(rgu,. Back Side, Khammam Maihira city and Districi permanenily Xnammam oi.stri;i^'' residing^""'-"' at t-t.trto.i-t'ts n.c.rr,rl inurcn

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary (Home) Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

2 The Commissioner of Police, Khammam City, Khammam District

¶12

Smt.Shaik Waheedunnisa, W/o late l,4ansoor Ali Aged 40 years, Occ. Household R/o H. No.6-1 3-368, New Colony Dhamsalapuram, khammam Urban lr,4andal Khammam District

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndla praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, order or direction preferably Writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in trying to disburse the death benefits of petitioner's father in favor of 3rd respondent, despite my representation/objection dated 23.12.2019 and Legal notice dated 06,01 .2020 and not considering the claim of the^petitioner for release of death benefits and to provide compassionate appointment as illegal, arbitrary and violative of^prrnciples of natural^justice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent not to extend any benefits in view of death of father of the^petitioner in favor of 3rd respondent and further direct the said authority to extend all the benefits to the petitioner by conducting enquiry by following due procedure

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the disbursement of death benefits or extension of any other benefits in view of death of father of the petitioner namely late lVansoor Ali, in favor of 3rd respondent, in view of representation / objection submitted by the petitioner dated 23.12.2019 and Legal Notice dated 06.01.2020, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of^justice.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 TO 2 : GP FOR SERVICES (HOME)

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN^RAO

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.34O8 OF 2O2O

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Petitioner claims to be the daughter of Shaik Mansoor Ali, who was working as Head Constable and died while in ser-vice on 08.08.2019. According to the petitioner, her mother died on 25.O7.2006. After the death ol mother, lather oI peritioner married the 3'd respondent, who is blessed with two children and both of them are minors. Petitioner claims that after the death of her father, there was settlement between the petitioner and the 3.a respondent for apportionment of distribution of death benefits and family pension. In terms thereof, petitioner submitted representation to the Commissioner of Police on 23.12.2O19 claiming that she should be paid share of death benefits of her father al1d to provide employment. Copv of the representation stated to have been filed and acknowledged by the Office of the Commissioner o1- police on 23.I2.2O19 is placed on record as exhibit p1.

¶24

In view thereof, without expressing any opinion on merits in issue, Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Commissioner of Police (2"a respondent) to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 23.12-2O19 and to pass appropriate orders within a period of six rl,,eeks from the date of receipt ol copy of this order, by assigning reasons in support of the decision and communicate the same to the petitioner. pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

¶25

¶26

To,

¶27

SD/. CH VENKATESHWAR ASSISTAIffiREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ,'-r+SECTION OFFICER

¶28

The State of Telangana Principal Secretary (Home) Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶29

The, Commissioner of Police, Khammam Clty, Khammam District

¶30

J. One CC to SRl. KOWTURU PAVAN KUTVAR Advocate [OpUC]

¶31

Two, CCs to GP FOR HOIVE (TG) ,High Court for the State of Tetangana. [OUT]

¶32

lry_o_9Os^{to GP FOR SERVTCES (TG)} ,High Court for the State of Tetangana. tourl

¶33

rflsv6. Two CD Copies

HIGH^COURT

PNRJ

DATED:0510312020

ORDER

1 t{E S 15:
oo 2 0 APil 2020 c,
c
ilAT

WP.No.3408 of²⁰²⁰

DISPOSING OF THE WP

WITHOUT COSTS

t qcoPia/"rJ )r- iq"-*

Smt.Shaik , Patan Seema Sulthana v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Shaik , Patan Seema Sulthana v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

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

Sri Guvva Anjaneyulu, Ex- Estates Officer Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

P. Jai Kishan, Vs The District Collector (P.W)

S. Vamshi Krishna, Vs The State of Telangana

Gownicadi Venkateswar Vs Tsrtc and 5 others

Kummari Krishna Murthy Vs The Telangana State Public Service Commission (Tspsc)

The Depot Manager Vs S.Ramesh