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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 47692

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. ASHA
MARAGADHAVALLI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent



##PAGE1##

WP No. 30868 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-04-2026

CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

WP No. 30868 of 2024 and WMP.No.9880 of 2026

Maragadhavalli No.6/72, Mariyamman Kovil Street

Ammampalayam Village, Maruvathur (PO)

Thuraiyur Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District-621 002.

..Petitioner Vs

1. Union of India Rep by its Secretary Ministry of Defence Government of India New Delhi-110 011.

2. The Chief of Air Staff Vayu Bhavan

New Delhi-110 011.

3. The Director Director of Air Veterans

Air Head Quarters Subroto Park,

New Delhi-110 010.

4. The Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pensions)

Draupadi Ghat Allahabad

Pin - 211 014 (UP).

..Respondents

__________ Page1 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/06/2026 03:14:32 pm )

##PAGE2##

WP No. 30868 of 2024

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st to 4th respondents to grant/pay the Family Pension to the petitioner being a divorced and dependent daughter of the deceased Air Veteran 207927 H, JWO A.P.Pitchai Pillai, at the time of his death on 6-8-2016 with effect from 30-10-2021 and eligible in terms of GoI MoD Letter No.1(9)2013-D(Pen-Policy) dated 17-11-2017 after confirming her eligibility in terms of any other conditions as applicable policy guidelines in accordance with law within the time as may be fixed by this

Hon’ble Court and pass orders.

For Petitioner: Mr.T.Sundaranathan

For Respondents: Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi Central Government Standing Counsel

for R1 to R4

ORDER

The petitioner seeks a mandamus to respondents 1 to 4 to grant / pay the

Family Pension to her being a divorced and dependent daughter of the deceased

A.P.Pitchai Pillai.

2. The facts are as follows :

(a)The petitioner’s father named P.A.Ptichai Pillai was an Ex-serviceman

and War Veteran having retired from service of Indian Air Force (IAF) in the rank of Junior Warrant Officer (JWO), on 31.10.1986.

__________ Page2 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/06/2026 03:14:32 pm )

##PAGE3##

WP No. 30868 of 2024

Besides the petitioner, his father and her mother Parvathi, had two other children. The petitioner's elder brother is Veeramani and her younger sister is Gomathi. Veeramani got married and he is living separately with his family. Gomathi had lost her husband and had two

children to take care of.

(b)The petitioner would submit that she belonged to Mooopanar

Community. She was married to one Karuppusamy on 19.08.1987 and her marital life lasted for 34 days, and she was forced to leave the matrimonial home on account of cruelty meted out by her husband and his family members. They both were separated permanently by the panchayat consisting of village elders, and a deed of divorce (Vivaga Rathu Pathiram) dated 23.09.1988 was executed and the same was registered as Doc.No.39/1988/IV on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Perambalur. Her husband had subsequently re-married and has children through the second wife. The petitioner continued to live

with her father and she had not re-married thereafter.

(c)The petitioner's mother pre-deceased her father on 12.09.2014, and

since there was no other person to take care of petitioner after him, the petitioner's father had applied to include the petitioner's name as dependent, for receiving the Dependent Family Pension. The petitioner would submit that even in the reply of the 3rd respondent, he had stated that though the petitioner, was a divorcee, she was entitled

__________ Page3 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/06/2026 03:14:32 pm )

##PAGE4##

WP No. 30868 of 2024

to the family pension after the demise of her parents, namely the petitioner's father and her mother. It is also stated in the communication that as there was no provision to endorse the name of the divorcee daughters in the PPO in advance, the petitioner's father

was advised to approach them as and when the contingencies arise.

(d)The petitioner's father had passed awa

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top