← Library
Madras High CourtWP/3873/2025disposed of

A.Haseena v. The Manager

2025-02-24Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN A. Haseena ... Petitioner Vs The Manager, State Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Pallavan House, Chennai 600 002. .... Respondent Prayer :- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to grant family pension to the petitioner on account of death of N.Abdul Kuthuz (Employee ID.No.D25289) died on 04.05.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.M.V.Seshachari For Respondent : No appearance 1/5

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to grant family pension to the petitioner on account of death of N.Abdul Kuthuz (Employee ID.No.D25289) who died on 04.05.2021.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it had been stated that the husband of the petitioner namely N.Abdul Kuthuz was employed as a Special Grade Driver in the respondent Corporation with Employee ID.No.D25289. He had initially joined service on 01.04.1996 at Ambattur Depot. While in service he died owing to illness on 04.05.2021. It must be deeply appreciated that the petitioner had come forward by stating the correct facts and complete facts in her affidavit. She had stated that her husband had first married Kamrunisa as first wife and she died on 31.12.2005 and after her death the petitioner had married her husband on 18.11.2007. This marriage is lawful and has to be recognised as lawful. It had been stated that the Chief Government Kazi 2/5

had also issued a certificate dated 23.02.2007 certifying the validity of the marriage between the petitioner and N.Abdul Kuthuz. Thereafter, her husband had also, by letter dated 15.03.2010 sought to include the name of the petitioner in his service records. It is contended that unfortunately he died while in service on 04.05.2021. The respondent had issued a letter dated 01.11.2023 seeking clarification of the identity of another lady Basheerabi whom the petitioner claims that is a non existence person.

3. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents today and also in the previous two hearings dates i.e., 10.02.2025 and 17.02.2025, though the name of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents had been directed to be printed in the cause list.

4. Taking into consideration all these facts, a direction is issued to the respondent to examine the representation of the petitioner and disburse the terminal benefits payable to N.Abdul Kuthuz to the petitioner unless there are any other Court orders specifically stating that 3/5

it should not be so disbursed. If there is no such impediment, then the terminal benefits must be disbursed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. 24.02.2025 dpq Index: Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order To The Manager, State Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Pallavan House, Chennai 600 002.

4/5

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

dpq 24.02.2025 5/5