S.Vijayakumar v. Government Of Tamil Nadu, Rep
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 31.07.2018 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.No.18314 of 2004 and W.P. M.P. No.21816 of 2004 S.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner Vs.
1.Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Govt., Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul.
4.Thasildar, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul.
... Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the fourth Respondent in his notification Na.Ka.12039/2003 /G dated 25.11.2003 and to quash the same and to direct the Fourth Respondent to pass an order to grant the Petitioner the Mallikana Allowance for Madoor Zamin. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gopalaratnam For Respondent : Mr. K.S.Suresh Government Advocate
O R D E R
Heard Mr.S.Gopalratnam, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr.K.S.Suresh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents.
2.The Petitioner claims to belong to the family of Madoor Zamin. After the abolition of Zamin, the father of the Petitioner viz., T.Sundararajan, was paid Mallikana Allowance as pension commencing from 23.08.1977 till his death on 07.12.1990. Thereafter, the Petitioner had made an application to the Second Respondent to pay pension.
The Petitioner received a communication on 20.08.1999, wherein it was informed that he was not entitled to Mallikana Allowance as legal heir. The Petitioner thereafter made representations and ultimately by order Na.Ka.12039/2003/G dated 25.11.2003, the Fourth Respondent had rejected the claim of the Petitioner on the ground that the Principal Commissioner, Revenue & Administration, Chennai had stated that there is no provision in the Rules and Regulations to grant Mallikana Pension on the ground of legal heirship. In this factual backdrop, the Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the aforesaid order Na.Ka.12039/2003/G dated 25.11.2003 passed by the Fourth Respondent and for consequential direction to grant Mallikana Allowance for Madoor Zamin to the Petitioner.
3.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, Mr.K.S.Suresh, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents states that the District Collector, Dindigul in his communication Na.Ka.55691/2007/T2 dated 30.07.2018 addressed to the Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chennai, had recommended the case of the Petitioner for grant of Mallikana Allowance on the basis that his father was getting the same in accordance with the Government Rules and Regulations and copy of the said letter has also been produced.
Though the Commissioner of Revenue Administration is not a party to this Writ Petition, it is expected that he would consider the claim of the Petitioner, in the light of the recommendation made by the District Collector, Dindigul, and pass suitable orders on merits in accordance with law and communicate the decision taken to all concerned. Hence, it would suffice to record the aforesaid subsequent developments and without expressing any view on the correctness or entitlement of the claim made by the Petitioner, dispose the Writ Petition, leaving it open to the Petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies, if he has any further grievance in the matter.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
To 1.Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Govt., Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul.
4.Thasildar, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul.
+1cc to Mr.R.Nandakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.51762 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.52385 W.P.No.18314 of 2004 SSV(CO) GSP(06/09/2018)