S. SANDHYA, S. LEENA AND S. PEROLI Vs. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., T&D CIRCLE, SANCHAR VIKAS BHAVAN, RESIDENCY ROAD, JABALPUR -482001, MADHYA PRADESH,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Daughters of a Sub Divisional Engineer, Transmission Unit, Office of the Director, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., (BSNL), Chennai, claiming themselves as legal heirs, entitled to the terminal benefits, on account of the death of their father, have sought for a Mandamus, directing to the respondents 1 to 3 to pay the same. The 4th respondent is the brother of the deceased, in whose favour, the nomination has been made, by the employee. According to the petitioners/daughters, their father expired on 31.03.2002, in harness. The marriage between their parents was dissolved by a decree of divorce in 1989. As per the Hindu Succession Act, they are the Class-I heirs and that even if there was any dissolution of marriage between the parents, the right of the children, to seek for retiral benefits, will not be taken away by such dissolution. They also submitted that the 4th respondent, younger brother of their father has staked his claim for the terminal benefits, and due to his illegal claim, terminal benefits have not been sanctioned so far.

(2.) Petitioners have also submitted that the 4th respondent had already received a sum of Rs. 5,000/- and since there was an attempt to withdraw the balance amount of retiral benefits, the present writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus. In addition to the above pleadings Mr. P.V. Balasubramaniam, learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Shipra Sengupta Vs. Mridul Sengupta and Others, 2009 10 SCC 680 , submitted that the 4th respondent, brother of the deceased, cannot be a recipient of the retiral benefits and at best, he can only be a trustee, for receiving the retiral benefits, on behalf of the legal heirs, entitled to succeed, as per the law of succession, governing them and for the above said reasons, prayed for a suitable direction to the official respondents, to disburse the retiral benefits due and payable to petitioners' father, to the petitioners.

(3.) The Deputy General Manager, Acceptance and Testing, T&D Circle, Chennai, in his counter affidavit has submitted that the petitioners' father was working as a Sub Division Engineer in the office of the Deputy General manager (A&T), Chennai-15 and that he expired on 31.03.2002. He has also admitted that the petitioners/children of the above said officer have made a claim for the disbursement of retiral benefits and that they have also produced legal heirship certificate from the concerned revenue authority. The Deputy General Manager, has also stated that a similar claim has also been made by 4th respondent, younger brother of the deceased employee. He has further stated that Mr. E. Sivaprakasam, the deceased employee, during his life time has nominated the 4th respondent, younger brother, to receive the following benefits. 1. Death-cum-retirement gratuity 2. General Provident Fund 3. Central Government Employee Group Insurance.