Y GANGULAMMA Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of the Labour Court, Anantapur in M.P. NO. 67 of 1986, dated 27-9-1986 has been the subject matter of assailment in this Writ Petition.

(2.) The petitioner claiming to be the legal heir of the deceased Yeddula Gangadu, a workman under the 2nd respondent-South Central Railway claimed the service benefits of the deceased on his death. She also produced a succession certificate in support of her claim. The 2nd respondent had paid the service benefits of the deceased to the petitioner except death-cum-retirement gratuity. The Labour Court rejected the claim on the ground that she is not one of the legal heirs of the deceased and, therefore, she is not entitled to the said service benefit of the deceased.

(3.) The admitted facts are these- Y. Gangadu was working under the 2nd respondent. He died issueless on 19-9-1981. He left behind him only his mother as his wife had pre-deceased him. It is said that he had no issues. The mother also died on 18-12-1981. Y. Gangadu was terminated from service by the 2nd respondent on 7-12-1981. The deceased Gangadu was entitled to provident fund, gratuity and insurance amounts said to be estimated at Rs. 16,000/-. In the counter, the respondent No. 2 pleaded that the deceased was made unfit for any category of service with effect from 27-8-1981 and a sum of Rs.6377-which was due to the deceased towards provident fund and Rs.150.45ps. towards insurance premium paid, were paid to the petitioner when she produced the succession certificate and she is not entitled to death-cum-retirement gratuity and she is not a member of the family of Y.Gangadu under Rule 901 of Railway Pension Rules, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The Labour Court considered the claim of the petitioner to examine whether she was entitled for death-cum-retirement gratuity due to the deceased. It came to the conclusion that the petitioner did not come within the definition of 'family' under Rule 901 of the Rules and, therefore, she cannot be allowed to have the claim in regard to the same.