CHINNAPAPPA Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to pay arrears of pension of Rs. 2,50,000/- as per the settlement arrived by the pension Lok Adalat, dated 8.6.2010 by the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority with interest at the rate of 18% per annum with the stipulated time. The writ petition when it came up for admission on 04.09.2012, the learned Special Government Pleader was directed to take notice. On notice, a counter affidavit, dated 08.10.2012 was filed by the third respondent, which was adopted by other respondents 1, 2 and 4. The petitioner is the mother of late K. Govindan, who was working as a Gang Mazdoor under the third respondent at Mettur sub division. He died on 26.04.2001 while in service. The fifth respondent is his wife and she had received all his death benefits, including family pension of late K. Govindan from 26.04.2001 to 26.08.2006. Afterwards, she got married to one R. Madhesan on 27.08.2006. In view of the fact that the widow of late Govindan got remarried, there is no obligation for the State Government to expand the family pension to the 5th respondent and that the pension was stopped for her on account of her remarriage which took place on 27.08.2006. Thereafter, no pension was paid to any one. However, the petitioner filed a suit before the District Munsif Court at Mettur being O.S. No. 162 of 2007. In that suit, she claimed for a declaratory relief, i.e., that she is the legal heir of late Govindan. In that suit, she has made present respondents as party defendants. After trial, the learned Munsif, Mettur, by a judgment and decree, dated 7.3.2008, had decreed the suit. It was declared that the petitioner is the sole legal heir of late Govindan and all benefits including pension payable to Govindan has to be paid to her within three months from the date of the judgment. But the relief regarding the mandatory direction for the grant of employment was rejected. The sole ground on which the suit was decreed was based upon Section 10(1) of the Hindu Succession Act. Since the 5th respondent had remarried, she lost the status of widow of late Govindan. Therefore, the petitioner in the absence of any other legal heirs, becomes the legal heir as she belonged to Hindu religion.

(2.) After the judgment of the civil court, the Chief Engineer (General), Highways Department sent a communication to the State Government on various dates including 26.02.2009, 25.06.2009, 17.07.2009 and 05.04.2010. A proposal was sent to the Accountant General. But, it was indicated that under Rule 49 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, it is only in the absence of the wife, the widowed daughter or divorced daughter or son or daughter can be paid family pension. In case where a Government servant dies unmarried, then only his parents will be eligible for family pension. The proposal was returned by the Accountant General. Notwithstanding the same, the petitioner made a complaint before the Pension Lok Adalat organized by the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority and notice was issued by the Pension Lok Adalat to the parties. When the matter came up before the Pension Lok Adalat, it had suggested relaxation of necessary rule in favour of the petitioner so as to make her eligible to get family pension.

(3.) Based on the observation made by the Lok Adalat, the State Government had issued G.O.Ms. No. 193, Highways and Small Ports Department, dated 01.06.2010. By the said G.O., the State Government had relaxed Rule No. 49(6)(i), 49(13)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 by exercising of power under Rule 82 of the said Rule. Before issuance of the G.O., they had also obtained an opinion of the Government Pleader. Therefore, when the matter was called before the Pension Lok Adalat on 8.6.2010, on behalf of the State, a copy of the G.O., was produced before the authorities. Instead of recording the G.O. and disposing of the matter, curiously, the Lok Adalat had passed the following order: