Back
2022 Supreme(Mad) 597
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
P. Grace Thavamani – Appellant
Versus
The Special Tahsildar, Perambalur & Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 28510 of 2014
Decided on : 06-07-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :P. Raja, Advocate.
For the Respondents: R.L. Karthika, adv
Disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner must furnish all required details and documents to the competent authority for consideration and initiation of appropriate action.
Headnote:
Pension Sanction - Disputed Facts - The court directed the petitioner to furnish all required details and documents to the competent authority to enable the preparation and submission of the pension proposal, emphasizing that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner sought sanction of pension, regularization of dearness allowance, and other monetary benefits accrued to her deceased husband, a teacher, but the claim was rejected due to a pending criminal case against the deceased employee.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the petitioner to furnish all required details and documents to the competent authority, and upon such application, the respondents were directed to consider and initiate appropriate action to redress the petitioner's grievance.
Issues: Rejection of pension claim due to pending criminal case against deceased employee, petitioner's contention that deceased's name was not included in the criminal case, and the requirement of furnishing details and documents to the competent authority.
Ratio Decidendi: Disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner must furnish all required details and documents to the competent authority for consideration and initiation of appropriate action.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to furnish all required details and documents to the competent authority, and for the respondents to consider and initiate appropriate action.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings in Na.Ka.A/1088/2013 dated 03.10.2013 on the file of the first respondent herein and to quash the same, and to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to send the proposal for revised pension, regularization of dearness allowance and medical allowance, payment of Gratuity, leave encashment, and other monetary benefits accrued to the petitioner, with interest on the death of her husband.)
1. The order of rejection, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for sanction of pension, is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The impugned order dated 03.10.2013 issued by the first respondent states that a criminal case was pending against the deceased employee Mr.Ayyasami. Thus, the competent authority was not in a position to submit the pension proposals for sanction of pension.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the petitioner's husband late Ayyasami, who was working as Teacher in Ogalur Adhi Dravida Elementary School in Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur, died and his name was not included in the criminal case.
4. However, these disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has to furnish all the required details along with the necessary documents to the competent authority, enabling the authority to prepare the pension proposal and submit the same to the Accountant General of Tamil Nadu for approval.
5. A memo dated 18.11.2014 issued by the Special Tahsildar to the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer reveals that the husband of the petitioner was arrested during the relevant point of time and First Information Report was registered. The details regarding the status of the criminal case are required to be furnished and if the criminal case was disposed of, then the documents to that effect are to be submitted.
6. This being the factum the petitioner is at liberty to furnish all the details along with the relevant documents to the competent authority and in the event of any such application along with the requisite documents, the respondents are directed to consider the same and initiate all appropriate action to redress the grievance of the petitioner in the manner known to law.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
