IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No : 20506 of 2003 Between: Smt. Ummalla Ramulamma S/o late Sri Ummalla Bhojji R/o Reddygudem Village, Tirumala Kunta Hamlet, Ashwaraopet Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P. TRANSCO, Rep. by its Managing Director, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P.S.E.B., Khammam. 3 The Divisional Engineer, Electrical Operation, A.P.S.E.B., Khammam. 4 Divisional Engineer, A.P.S.E.B., Bhadrachalam, Khammam. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Orders more particularly a "Writ of Mandamus" directing the Respondents herein to pay the Service beneﬁts and Pensionary beneﬁts of Late Sri U. Bojji expired on 24-8-1989 who served as Helper with the Respondent Authorities, to the petitioner herein and to pay @ of Rs. 1,000/- per month to the petitioner from 24-8-1989 till the date of payment of Service beneﬁts and Pensionary beneﬁts for illegal, arbitrary and inhuman, withholding of payment, ﬁnancial suﬀerings and mental agony of the Petitioner towards Compensation under Public Law for violation under Article 21 read with Articles 38, 39 and 46 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.SUMALINI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No : 20506 of 2003 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. The writ petition is ﬁled seeking a direction to the respondents-A.P.S.E.B., to pay the Service beneﬁts and Pensionary beneﬁts of Late Sri U. Bojji expired on 24-8- 1989 who served as Helper with the Respondent Authorities, to the petitioner herein and pay @ of Rs. 1,000/- per month from 24-8-1989 till the date of payment of Service Benefits and Pensionary benefits. The petitioner claims to be the wife of the deceased late Mutha Reddy, who was an employee of the respondent-Board, who died during the course of employment on 24.8.1989. She is an illiterate woman. She is having four minor children namely; 1) Tirupathamma 2) Bulamma, (3) Nagamani and (4) Venkatreddy. She made several applications to the respondent authorities, requesting for payment of service beneﬁts, pensionary beneﬁts of her deceased husband and for employment on compassionate grounds. The 3rd respondent issued vide proceedings dated 23.12.1992, appointing her on compassionate grounds as S.W.G/S.O.R with a pay scale of Rs.1,080/-. The 3rd respondent herein vide Memo dated 24.12.1992, posted the petitioner at Aswaraopet under the control of the 4th respondent. She worked for 5 to 6 months as Sweeper at the residence of the Higher Authority of the respondent-Corporation. Later on, she discontinued her employment as sweeper. It is also her case that inspite of her applications seeking for service beneﬁts and pension beneﬁts of her husband, she was not paid. Again, she made a representation in 1995. The 4th respondent orally informed that she should produce a certiﬁcate showing that she was mentally unsound of mind for all these years and upon production of such certiﬁcate, the Corporation would pay the service beneﬁts and pensionary beneﬁts. In spite of the repeated representations, as the petitioner was not paid the service beneﬁts and pension beneﬁts of her deceased husband, she filed this writ petition. This Court granted interim order on 27.11.2003 in WPMP No.25668 of 2003, directing the respondents to pay half of the service beneﬁts and pensionary beneﬁts, pending disposal of the writ petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of the interim order granted by this Court, half of the service beneﬁts and pensionary benefits are paid to the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, a counter has been ﬁled wherein it is stated that the petitioner is the wife of late Bojju. During the year 1990, in the Division Oﬃce, Badrachalam, the pension proposals were submitted to the Superintending Engneer/Operation/Khammam for sanction of PPO and DCRG vide letter dated 19.11.1990. But the said proposals of the petitioner were returned by the Superintending Engineer Operation/Khammam with the following remarks:- “1. Descriptive roll of Kumari. Thirupathamma, Unmarried daughter of late Sri Ummkalla Bojji to arrange payment part of DCRG. 2. Two pass port size photos of Smt.U.Ramullamma. 3. In legal heir and death certiﬁcates issued, Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer/Aswaraopet, the fathers name of the deceased employee was furnished as “Mutha Reddy” but in Service Register, the deceased employee’s fathers name recorded as Muthyalu ( In S.R., father’s name recorded on the basis of health & age certiﬁcate issued by Government Medical Oﬃcer/Palvoncha, while joining into duty (SE Oﬃce memo furnished.)” It is also stated that if the petitioner produced the required documents, the authorities are ready to pay the terminal benefits. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since after considering the entitlement of the pensionary and service beneﬁts of husband of the petitioner, the authorities may be directed to pay the remaining 50% of the service and pensionary benefits. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is required under the rules that whoever claims the service or pensionery beneﬁts of the deceased- employee, have to prove their eligibility by producing the relevant documents. She further submits that in the instant case, though the pension papers were submitted by the petitioner in the year 1990, the same were returned by the Superintending Engineer/Operation/Khammam for want of the relevant documents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was given the compassionate appointment after the death of the deceased considering her to be the wife of the deceased. But in the counter, it is stated that on the veriﬁcation of the record with reference to the death certiﬁcate issued by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, the father’s name of the deceased employee was furnished as Mutha Reddy. But in the service register of the deceased employee, the father name was recorded as Muthyalu. But it does not say that the name of the deceased employee is not Bojji and it also does not say that the petitioner is not the wife of the deceased employee. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the petitioner was already paid 50% of the back wages and she worked as the Sweeper in the oﬃce of the respondent-Corporation and she acquired the job on the compassionate grounds based on the records produced by her. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider her case for payment of remaining 50% of the service beneﬁts of her husband to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _____________________ Justice G. Chandraiah Date:19.06.2008 mrb