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