Madras High CourtWP(MD)/5741/2012dismissed

P. Pandiyan, S/O.Pandian, v. The District Collector,

2022-06-23Honourable Mr Justice R.Vijayakumar2 pages

W.P.(MD).No.5741 of 2012 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.06.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.5741 of 2012 P.Pandiyan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Special Tahsildar, (Social Security & Welfare), Collectrate Buildings, Madurai - 20.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order of the first respondent dated 28.11.2008 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to disburse the death benefits of the petitioner's son Gopal in favour of the petitioner under the Tamil Nadu Agriculture Labour and Farmers and Social Security Welfare Scheme Act, 2006.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.R.Nimal For Respondents : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging an order passed by the second respondent, under which the request of the petitioner for grant of compensation for the death of his son under Tamil Nadu Labours and Agriculture and Farmers Social Security and Welfare Scheme, 2006 was rejected.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is a member under the above said scheme. As per the said scheme, the name of his wife and the son are also recorded in the Identity Card. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, if any one of them died due to an accident during the subsistence of the policy, they are entitled to compensation under the said scheme. According to the petitioner, his son, namely, Gopal had passed away https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD).No.5741 of 2012 on 11.01.2008 in an accident in Madurai. However, his request for grant of accident compensation was rejected by way of impugned order on the ground that the petitioner's son was not a member of this scheme. This order is under challenge in the present writ petition.

3. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the second respondent contended that as per the said scheme, only if there is an unfortunate death of a member of this scheme, the family members will be entitled to a compensation. In the present case, the son of the petitioner who is not a member under the scheme had passed away. Hence, it is not legally possible to grant compensation for the death of the son of a member.

4. I have perused the scheme relating to the payment of compensation arising out of an accident. It is clear that only when a member succumbs to an accident, the family members are entitled to receive compensation. In the present case, the petitioners's son who is not a member under the scheme had passed away in an unfortunate accident. Hence the second respondent has rightly rejected the request of the petitioner for grant of compensation. I did not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the second respondent herein.

5. The Writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // /07/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) jbr To

1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Special Tahsildar, (Social Security & Welfare), Collectrate Buildings, Madurai - 20.

+1 CC to M/s.C.K.M. APPAJI, Advocate ( SR-27890[F] dated 24/06/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-27996[F] dated 24/06/2022 ) Order made in W.P.(MD).No.5741 of 2012 23.06.2022 NA(CO)GC(07.07.2022) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2