The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking to quash the order of the 1st respondent dated 27.04.2015 passed in Lr.No.9313/240/F8/F81/PPO.34453/2015 in and by which it was communicated to the petitioner that her application for family pension cannot be entertained till the production of the original marriage certificate of the year 1977. The petitioner also sought a direction to the respondents to provide family pension to the petitioner with arrears.

2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:

i) The petitioner has submitted that she is the 2nd wife of late Raju and that her husband had worked under the 2nd respondent as a Revenue Supervisor in Samayanallur Division, Vikramangalam Section and retired from service on 31.05.2000 on attaining superannuation. Her husband was getting pension from the 1st respondent till his death on 05.09.2014 and his 1st wife, namely, Durgai Ammal, who was a Headmistress in Harijan Welfare Single Teacher School, also died on 27.05.1997, leaving her son by name Vijayasuresh. Due to the death of the 1st wife, the husband of the petitioner received Rs.10,000/- vide proceedings of the District Harijan Welfare Officer, Ramanathapuram in R.O.C.T10 and 181074/77 dated 03.10.1977.

ii) The petitioner has further submitted that she married her husband after three months of the demise of his first wife and their marriage was also solemnized on 26.08.1977 as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Subramaniyasamy Temple, Peraiyur in the presence of their relatives, elders and other family members. Out of their wedlock, they had three sons and all lived together including the son born through the 1st wife under the same roof till the death of her husband and thus, it is pleaded that she is a legally wedded wife of her husband.

iii) The petitioner has also submitted that the fact remains so, she applied for family pension on 20.09.2014 after the death of her husband to the 2nd respondent, which in turn was forwarded to the 1st respondent after verifying all the records, on receipt of which, the 1st respondent also sought a confirmation on 19.12.2014 as to whether the petitioner was the 1st wife or the 2nd wife. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent, taking into consideration the pension payment order bearing No.34453 of her husband and considering the fact that her name was duly entered as nominee in the respective column and upon appreciating the material facts that their family photo consisting of her husband and herself was affixed by her husband in his pension book, attested by her, had forwarded her pension application to the 1st respondent for further action. However, the 1st respondent, without considering all these factors, simply rejected her claim for family pension, which, on the fact of it, is illegal and is liable to be set aside.

iv) It is her plea that after her husband's death, she is starving for food and the family pension could not be denied on mere technicalities so as to defeat the real object of the family pension. The 1st respondent failed to see that the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 came into force only with effect from 24.11.2009 and prior to that, there was no such compulsion. Neither there is a dispute with regard to her marriage with her husband nor there is any rival claim of family pension. Hence, it is pleaded that the impugned order is against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

3. Though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in this case, they have submitted that since the petitioner is the 2nd wife of late Raju and no marriage certificate is produced by the petitioner in proof of her marriage with the said late Raju, the family pension could not be extended to the petitioner, as the said certificate is required under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009.

4. The petitioner has filed nearly 12 documents in the typedset of papers, in which one such document is the marriage invitation of the petitioner to