IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 7.7.2008. C O R A M : The Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.K.MISRA and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.13209 of 2008 and W.P.M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2008 C.Uma Devi Petitioner -vs- 1. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai-104. 2. Union of India, rep by its Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi. 3. The Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway, Personnel Branch, Madras Division, Chennai-3. 4. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Personnel Branch, Chennai-3. 5. C.Rajesh 6. Venkatesan.C 7. Gopi.C 8. R.Chitra Raghavan Respondents Writ petition for issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in O.A.No.494 of 2004 dated 7.2.2008 and quash that portion of the order which directs respondents 2 to 4 to conduct a fresh enquiry in order to determine the legal status of the petitioner and to quash the consequential order of the fourth respondent in No.M/P.3/500/IV/DEC/2003, dated 30.5.2008 and to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ consequently direct respondents 2 to 4 herein to disburse the death-cum- retirement benefits of the deceased D.Chellappan in terms of the decree in O.S.No.95 of 2004 dated 28.9.2007 on the file of the learned Principal Family Court, Chennai. For petitioner : Mr.G.Jeremiah For RR6 and 7 : Mr.R.Karthikeyan For RR3 and 4 : Mr.V.G.Suresh Kumar ORDER (Order of the court was made by P.K.MISRA, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The question relates to payment of Family Pension. The present petitioner claims that she has married the deceased employee after the first marriage between the deceased employee and one Smt.Gowri was dissolved. However, this question is disputed by the Railways as according to the Railways, the marriage took place during the subsistence of the first marriage. 3. It appears that some inquiries had been conducted by the Railways. However, statement of many of the witnesses were taken behind the back of the present petitioner inasmuch as the notice of inquiry issued to the petitioner was not served on her because of change of address. 4. In these circumstances, we feel that there is a necessity of fresh enquiry in the presence of all the interested parties. Accordingly, the order passed by the Railways are set aside and the matter relating to payment of Family Pension is directed to be considered afresh after holding a fresh inquiry by giving opportunity to all the parties concerned. 5. The petitioner has expressed certain grievances relating to the previous enquiry officer. The respondents are directed to get the enquiry conducted through some other officer. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above and the matter is remanded for fresh enquiry. Such fresh enquiry shall be completed and decision be taken as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ssk. To 1. The Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi. 2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway, Personnel Branch, Madras Division, Chennai-3. 3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Personnel Branch, Chennai-3. 4. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai-104. +1cc to Mr.G.Jeremiah, Advocate Sr 35451 +1cc to Mr.V.G.Suresh Kumar, Advocate Sr 35064 DM (CO) km/22.7. W.P.No.13209 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/