Madras High CourtWP(MD)/29923/2024disposed of

Ramalakshmi v. The State Accountant

2025-06-23Honourable Mr.Justice Vivek Kumar Singh6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH W.P.(MD) No.29923 of 2024 Ramalakshmi : Petitioner Vs.

1. The State Accountant, Directorate of Pension, No.571, Combined Financial Department, Office Complex, Annasalai, Nanthanam, Chennai - 600 035.

2. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3. The Treasury Officer, District Treasury Office, Virudhunagar.

4. The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

5. The District Collector, Vilupuram District, Vilupuram.

6. The Tahsildar, Chenji Taluk, Vilupuram District.

: Respondents 1/6

P RAYER:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1,5 and 6 to take appropriate action to include the petitioner's name for family pension for death of her husband namely Chellasamy who was retired in the year of 2021 as Deputy Tahsildar at Chenji Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District and to grant family pension.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramu For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani (R2 to R6) Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1,5 and 6 to take appropriate action to include the petitioner's name for family pension for death of her husband namely Chellasamy, who retired in the year 2021 as Deputy Tahsildar at Chenji Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District and to grant family pension.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

3. The petitioner's husband, who was working as Deputy Tahsildar at Chenji, Thiruvannamalai District, had attained superannuation in the year 2001 and he had been receiving his pension. He died on 2/6

16.07.2021. The petitioner and her children are the legal heirs of the petitioner's husband. However, family pension has not been sanctioned sofar for the reason that the petitioner's husband has not included the petitioner's name in the pension book, which came to the knowledge of the petitioner only under RTI. Therefore, the petitioner made several representations to the respondents to grant family pension to her and the petitioner was dragged to run from pillar to post. Finally, on 07.10.2024, the petitioner sent a representation to the sixth respondent seeking the aforesaid relief. However, the same has not been considered till date. Hence, this petition came to be filed.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the application of the petitioner is now pending with the sixth respondent and he may be directed to forward the same to the first respondent.

5. Considering the submissions made, this Court directs the sixth respondent to forward the application of the petitioner to the first respondent with all relevant records within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The first respondent, in turn, shall dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a 3/6

period of four weeks thereafter. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits.

6. With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 23.06.2025 Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Sm 4/6

To:-