Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
P.Samathanam – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.12806 of 2017
Decided on : 09-08-2024
Writ Petition - Terminal Benefits - The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of the petitioner's claim for terminal benefits and family pension for her deceased husband, a police constable, on the grounds that the husband had not claimed any pension during his lifetime and the petition was filed too late, long after his dismissal and death.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the rejection of her claim for terminal benefits and family pension for her deceased husband, Ponnaiah, a police constable who was dismissed from service in 1963 and died in 2003.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Ponnaiah had not made any claim for pension during his lifetime, and the petition was filed in 2017, which was significantly delayed after his dismissal and death.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to terminal benefits and family pension for her deceased husband despite the absence of a claim during his lifetime and the significant delay in filing the petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the lack of a claim for pension by the deceased during his lifetime and the delay in filing the writ petition were critical factors that negated the petitioner's entitlement to the benefits sought.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in pursuant to the first respondent proceedings in Na.Ka.No.H1/52676/2014 dated 17.10.2016 and quash the same as devoid of merits and direct the first respondent to pay the petitioner's husband deceased police constable Ponnaiah (PC.1615)'s terminal benefits and family pension to this petition within the period stipulated by this Court.
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the first respondent rejecting the representation of the petitioner seeking for terminal benefits and family pension in respect of her late husband Ponnaiah, who was a Police Constable.
2. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that Ponnaiah, the husband of the petitioner was dismissed from service on 22.06.1963. The petitioner's husband died on 08.09.2003. She would further submit that during the life time of Ponnaiah, no claim was made by him seeking for pension.
3. However, as seen from the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, the petitioner claiming to be the wife of the deceased Ponniah has filed this Writ Petition in the year 2017, seeking for family pension and other terminal benefits in respect of Ponnaiah, her deceased husband, who died in the year 2003. When the employee Ponnaiah himself had not claimed any pension while he was alive, the question of payment of family pension and terminal benefits as claimed in this writ petition by his wife does not arise, that too when the writ petition has been filed only in the year 2017 though Ponnaiah was dismissed from service in the year 1963 and he also died in the year 2003.
4. In the result, there is no merit in this Writ Petition.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
A claim for terminal benefits and family pension cannot be established if the deceased did not make a claim during his lifetime and if the application is filed significantly after the relevant events....
The conscious actions and representations of the deceased employee regarding the family pension benefit influenced the court's decision on the petitioner's entitlement to family pension.
Entitlement to family pension under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978.
A writ petition abates upon the death of the petitioner if legal heirs are not substituted, reflecting the importance of procedural compliance in legal proceedings.
Disputes over family pension nominee status must be adjudicated in civil court, not through writ petitions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
