SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17500

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
NYAPATHY VIJAY
P NIRMALA – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 33431/2025



##PAGE1##

2025:APHC:58590

APHC010644652025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3460]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

WRIT PETITION NO: 33431/2025

Between:

P Nirmala ...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. U RAMANJANEYULU

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES II

The Court made the following:

##PAGE2##

2

2025:APHC:58590

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

WRIT PETITION NO: 33431/2025

ORDER:

The Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondents in

not releasing the ‘Family Pension’ to the Petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:

The husband of the Petitioner, by name P. Kondaiah (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Deceased’), had worked as Junior Assistant under the

control of the Office of Superintendent Engineering, Water Resource

Officer, retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation in the

year 2017 and pension was sanctioned to the deceased on 15.06.2017 and

was receiving pension regularly. It is stated that as the first wife of the

deceased had died, the deceased had married the Petitioner on

18.01.1989. It is further stated that the children of the first wife as well as

the children of the Petitioner through deceased living together in utmost

harmony. While so, the deceased had expired on 28.12.2024. Thereafter,

the Petitioner gave representation through online grievance cell on

21.04.2025 for release of ‘Family Pension’ in favour of the Petitioner. It is

further stated that as per the Service Register, the name of the Petitioner is

shown as the ‘Wife’ of the deceased and inspite of the same, the ‘Family

Pension’ is not being released.

##PAGE3##

3

2025:APHC:58590

3. Though the case was adjourned for getting instructions by the

learned Assistant Government Pleader on 2.12.2025 and 9.12.2025, the

learned Assistant Government Pleader is unable to get the instructions

from the respondent authorities.

4. Considering that the Petitioner is claiming for Family Pension and is

in dire need of financial amounts, the matter is heard on its merits.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as the name of the

Petitioner is reflected in the Nomination Form (Annexure-II) and Group

Insurance Scheme as well as the retirement benefits as per the Service

Register, there is no reason for the Respondents to delay the Family

Pension to the Petitioner. The learned counsel specially pointed out to the

service record filed along with the writ petition, wherein the name of the

Petitioner is shown as 'Wife,' and showed her as ‘Nominee’ for the

retirement benefits of the deceased.

6. Heard the respective counsel.

7. The Service Register of the deceased shows that the Petitioner is the

‘wife’ and also ‘nominee’ to receive the lifetime arrears of pension and

retirement gratuity to be sanctioned by the Government in the event of

death of the Petitioner. In the light of the service record, the delay in

granting the relief claimed by the Petitioner cannot be sustained.

##PAGE4##

4

2025:APHC:58590

8. As per 50 (5) of the AP Revision Pension Rules,1980, a widowed

wife would be entitled to a ‘family pension,’ and the children would be

entitled only on certain conditions, which is not the scenario in this

particular case. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled to the relief sought in

this Writ Petition.

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following

directions:

i) The Respondents are directed to examine the representation of the

Petitioner dated 21.04.2025 and initiate proceedings for sanction of

‘ Family Pension” to the Petitioner from the date of the entitlement of the

Petitioner.

ii) The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

iii) There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top