Mrs. Rajammal, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.04.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.18339 of 2014 Mrs.Rajammal W/olate M.Rangaswamy ..
Petitioner -vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by its Secretary Transport Department Secretariat Chennai 600 009
2. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by its Secretary Finance Department Secretariat Chennai 600 009
3. The State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. (Tamil Nadu) rep by its Managing Director Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai 600 002
4. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Royapettah Chennai 600 014
5. The Assistant Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation Sub Regional Office Salem 636 004 ..
Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to grant Tamil Nadu State Government Family Pension and pay arrears of family pension to the petitioner as per G.O.Ms.No.189 Transport Department dated 13.08.2004 from 16.10.2012, the date of death of petitioner's husband for the service rendered by petitioner's husband in the State Transport Department by following the judgments in W.A.No.1246 of 2009
dated 18.08.2010 and W.P.No.230 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and direct the fourth and fifth respondents to stop payment of Employees Provident Fund Family Pension to the petitioner forthwith and furnish the statement of account of total Provident Fund Pension paid to the petitioner's husband and Provident Fund Family Pension to the petitioner to the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to enable them to pay to the petitioner the family pension as per the orders of this Hon'ble Court referred to above.
For Petitioner ::
Mr.D.Sadhasivan For Respondents::
Mr.A.Kumar Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.P.Paramasivadoss for R3 Ms.R.Meenakshi for R5 No appearance for R4
ORDER
Mrs.Rajammal's husband late M.Rangaswamy, who was appointed as Driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Department on 1.5.69, was absorbed in the erstwhile Pallavan Transport Corporation Limited on 14.82, presently known as the State Express Transport Corporation Limited. After serving in various Corporations, finally the petitioner's husband late M.Rangaswamy retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.4.95 and he was also drawing the Government pension for the services rendered in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Department from 1.5.69 to 31.3.82 under the Pension Payment Order No.C381640/TPT. After his retirement, he was also drawing pension under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme for the services rendered in the State Express Transport Corporation Limited from 1.4.82 to 30.4.95.
Unfortunately he passed away on 16.10.2012. After his death, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been receiving a sum of Rs.529/- as the family pension under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1995 from the Sub Treasury through the State Bank of India, Bhavani Sagar Branch. As the said amount was very meagre and the Government's family pension was not paid to her for the services rendered by her husband in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Department from 1.5.69 to 31.3.82 and that the Government also issued an order stating that the employees of the erstwhile Transport Department who were permanently absorbed in the Transport Corporations are not entiled to the benefit of family pension, the said order was put to challenge in W.P.No.
21204 of 1992 by the Tamil Nadu State Transport and Transport Corporation Retired Employees Association, which was allowed by order dated 7.3.2011. Thereafter the Government also issued G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.
had filed the aforesaid writ petition. Therefore, the same Association filed another W.P.No.19585 of 2003 on the ground that the benefit granted in W.P.No.21204 of 1992 by order dated 7.3.2001 should be extended to the other employees who were similarly placed. The said writ petition was also allowed and consequently the Government came forward to extend the benefit of family pension to all the employees of the State Transport Department by issuing G.O.Ms.No.189, Transport Department dated 13.8.2004. Thereafter, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 making it clear that the order in G.O.Ms.No.189 dated 13.8.2004 was not applicable to the members of the Association who were absorbed in the State Transport Undertakings and who had come under the Employees Provident Fund Pension Scheme from 16.11.
95 onwards and entitled for getting family pension under the Employees Provident Fund Act. This was also challenged by one Tmt.A.Loganayaki, spouse of an ex-employee, in W.P.No.35643 of 2007. Though the said writ petition was dismissed by order dated 12.1.2009, pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.1246 of 2009 vide order dated 18.8.2010, which was also confirmed by the Supreme Court by order dated 13.5.2011 in C.C.No.8381 of 2011, the Government implemented the order by issuing G.O.(3D) No.38, Transport Department dated 7.9.2011. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner, who is similarly placed like that of Tmt.A.Loganayaki, spouse of an exemployee, should be extended the same benefit.
2. Mr.P.Paramasivadoss, learned standing counsel for the third respondent, fairly conceding to the said prayer, submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 18.8.2010, while giving a direction to the first respondent herein to sanction family pension to the appellant therein with effect from 13.8.2004, made it clear that the appellant Tmt.A.Loganayaki was not entitled to the Employees Provident Fund pension with a further direction to the first respondent to deduct the Employees Provident Fund pension paid to the appellant therein with effect from 13.8.2004 as well as the amount paid to her husband by way of employer's contribution viz., Rs.50,788/- from the arrears payable to her. The said order, he pleaded, also made it clear that in case the arrears amount was not sufficient to recover the amount indicated above, it was open to the respondents to recover the balance from the monthly pension payable to the appellant in 36 equal instalments.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. Considering the fact that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed in W.A.No.1246 of 2009 dated 18.8.2010, this writ petition stands allowed as prayed for with a direction to the first respondent to grant the family pension to the petitioner with effect from
the date of death of the petitioner's husband and also the arrears of family pension after deducting the amount of total provident fund pension paid to the petitioner's husband and to the petitioner, in the light of the direction issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the aforesaid order. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ss s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To
1. The Secretary to Government Transport Department Secretariat Chennai 600 009
2. The Secretary to Government Finance Department Secretariat Chennai 600 009
3. The Managing Director State Express Transport Corporation Ltd.(Tamil Nadu) Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai 600 002
4. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Royapettah Chennai 600 014
5. The Assistant Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation Sub Regional Office Salem 636 004 + 1 cc to Mr.D.Sadhasivan,Advocate, SR 23674 + 1 cc to Mr.P.Paramasivadoss, Advocate, SR 23934 + 1 cc to Govt.Pleader, High Court, Madras SR 23880 + 2 ccs to Mrs.R.Meenakshi, Advocate SR 23227 & 24089 kk(co) prk17/5 W.P.No.18339 of 2014