Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1034/2017disposed of

M.Roselet, v. The Managing Director,

2017-02-13Honourable Mr Justice S. Vaidyanathan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.02.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.(MD) No.1034 of 2017 M.Roselet ... Petitioner Vs.

The Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporation, Pallavan Salai, Chennai- 600 002.

.. Respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to sanction and pay the family pension of the Petitioner's husband Late.V.Dhavithu(Staff No.218) for his Government Service rendered in the erst while State Express Transport Corporation. For Petitioner :

M/s.Christenson Jugunu For Respondent :

Mr.K.Sathiya Singh Standing Counsel *****

O R D E R

This petition has been filed, seeking a direction to sanction and pay the family pension of the Petitioner's husband Late.V.Dhavithu(Staff No.218) for his Government Service rendered in the erst-while State Express Transport Corporation. 2.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

3.The case of the petitioner is that her husband V.Dhavithu employed as Conductor in the respondent/Corporation at Nagercoil and thereafter promoted as Ticket Checking Inspector and while in service, he died on 27.11.1986. The Petitioner's husband has completed ten years of service in the respondent Corporation and hence he was eligible to get pension from 1.5.1992. Since the Petitioner's husband died during service, the Petitioner is entitled to get the monthly pension and in this regard the Petitioner has submitted a representation, dated 27.5.2016 to the respondent herein and since the said representation did not evoke https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

any response, the petitioner is before this Court with the relief stated supra.

4. The counsel for the respondent would submit that it is agreeable for the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders thereon.

5.In view of the submission, the respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.05.2016 and to pass appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order., if there is no other legal impediment to do so. 6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (R) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar vsn +1CC to Mr.D.Christenson Jugunu, Advocate Sr.No.8308 +1CC to Mr.K.Sathiya Singh, Advocate Sr.No.7742 GJM/MR/SAR-II/6.3.2017/2P-3C W.P.(MD) No.1034 of 2017 13.02.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/