R. MAHADEVAN Vs. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT GENERAL, (ACCOUNTS AND ENTITLEMENTS) OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the second respondent dated 29.09.2014, rejecting the application of the petitioner to grant him family pension on the date of death of his adoptive mother, who appears to be a widow of the Government servant namely Sri.Ramalingam, died in harness to be illegal, arbitrary and to quash the same and with a prayer to direct the respondents to sanction family pension in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law i.e., till the date of his attaining the age of 25 years.

(2.) It appears that one Mr.Ramalingam, who was working in the Education Department of the Government of Tamilnadu had entered into the service on 18.12.1981 as a Secondary Grade Teacher. Thereafter, he was promoted as Headmaster and while under the employment as such, he died on 10.03.2007. His wife namely Smt.R.Kattimuthal, had applied for family pension and family pension order was issued to her by the first respondent on 27.01.2009, indicating therein her entitlement towards family pension. It was mentioned therein that the present petitioner happens to be her son. In receipt of the family pension, the wife of the deceased employee having died on 14.05.2013, The petitioner herein as such made a claim for family pension, wherein, he was asked to furnish his proof regarding his relationship with the pensioner and accordingly, he submitted the legal heir certificate to the first respondent, which indicates that he happens to be the foster son of the deceased employee. Thereafter, the prayer made by the petitioner for family pension was refused. According to the respondents, it is only the legally adopted son is entitled to family pension in respect of a deceased Government servant and a "foster son" being not finding a place in the list of eligible family members for receiving the family pension in respect of a deceased Government servant, the petitioner is not entitled to get the family pension. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court by challenging the same in this writ petition to be illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law.

(3.) According to the petitioner, since he is the legally adopted son of the Government servant and the Tahsildar though mentioned him to be the foster son of the employee died in harness in the legal heir certificate, the petitioner should not suffer more particularly, when in the family pension order of his mother, he has already been shown as a son as such, the petitioner is entitled to the family pension till he attains the age of 25 years.