Manchula P v. The Superintendent Engineer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND P.Manchula ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, TNEB, K.Pudur, Madurai.

2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TamilNadu Electricity Board, Elumalai, Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to grant family pension of the petitioners deceased father namely Subbiah to him based upon his representation dated 05.03.2025 within stipulated time fixed by this Honble Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Anbu Manikandan Tamil Sooriyan For Respondents : Mr.B.Ramanathan Standing Counsel 1/6

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to grant family pension of the petitioner's deceased father namely Subbiah to her based upon her representation dated 05.03.2025 within a stipulated time.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

3. The case of the petitioner is that her father worked in the respondent bank and retired from service on 31.03.2006 and he died on 23.03.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner's mother received family pension from the second respondent. The petitioner got married with one Pandi and he died on 16.01.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner returned to parental house and staying with her mother by depending on her. The mother of the petitioner died on 16.05.2001. After demise of her mother, the petitioner approached the respondents and requested them to grant family pension to her. Finally she made an application on 05.03.2025 requesting to grant family pension to her being the dependant widow daughter of the employee of the respondent board. As there is 2/6

no response from the respondents, the petitioner is constrained to file this writ petition.

4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Board submits that as per the Board Regulations dated 02.03.2018 along with the application of the petitioner, the petitioner has to submit certain documents for consideration of her eligibility to grant family pension.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner or the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent both are not in a position to state that along with her representation dated 05.03.2025 whether the petitioner had enclosed all the relevant documents to consider her claim or not.

6. In view of the above factual position, if the petitioner is eligible for family pension of the deceased employee of the respondent Corporation, the respondents ought to have considered her representation dated 05.03.2025 as per their Board regulations.

7. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is disposed of with the 3/6

following directions:

i) The respondents shall consider the representation dated 05.03.2025 of the petitioner and take appropriate decision within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

ii) If the petitioner did not enclose the relevant document along with the representation dated 05.03.2025 to consider her claim for family pension, then, the respondents shall communicate the same to the petitioner to enable her to submit the required documents. On submission of the same, the respondents shall consider the claim of the petitioner for family pension within a period of four weeks thereafter.

There shall be no order as to costs.

02.04.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no CM 4/6

To:

1. The Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, TNEB, K.Pudur, Madurai.

2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TamilNadu Electricity Board, Elumalai, Madurai District.

5/6

BATTU DEVANAND , J.

CM 02.04.2025 6/6