IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.6.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.25536 of 2007 and M.P.No.1 of 2007 Jagadambal. .. Petitioner vs. The Secretary to Government, Transport (RW1) Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9 ... Respondent Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent relating to the G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 and to quash para 10 as illegal and ultra- vires and consequently directing the respondent to grant family pension to the petitioner with effect from 16.4.1998 to 6.3.2001, within a time frame as this Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Manohar For Respondent : Mr.T.Seenivasan, Additional Government Pleader ----- O R D E R This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 and to quash para 10 as illegal and ultra- vires and consequently direct the respondent to grant family pension to the petitioner with effect from 16.4.1998 to 6.3.2001, within a time frame as this Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner in this case claims benefit of family pension on or from the date of death of the pensioner/employee. However, such relief is denied partly in paragraph 10 of the G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.2002, which reads as follows:- "10. This order shall take effect from 7- 3-2001, the date of the Judgment of the High https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ court, Madras (OR) the date of the death of the eligible pensioner whichever is later." The employee in this case died on 15.4.1998 and was receiving pro- rata pension on the date of his death. Therefore, in terms of Rule 76 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, petitioner seeks family pension immediately from the date of the death of the employee. In the G.O.No.110, at para 10, the relevant date is the date of death of the pensioner or 7.3.2001 (i.e.), the date of judgment of the learned single Judge, whichever is later. In effect the petitioner in this case will lose family pension from the date of death of the pensioner till 7.3.2001. 3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent contended that the family pension under G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 will be from the date of the judgment of this court in W.P.No.21204 of 1992 or from the date of death of the employee which ever is later, as the entitlement to family pension is on the basis of the order of the learned single Judge. 4. In the present case, the employee died before the judgment of this court was rendered. The claim for family pension is as per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 and it takes effect on the death of the pensioner. In this regard the following decisions are relevant:- (i) State of Tamil Nadu and others – vs.-V.S.Balakrishnan and others reported in 1994 Supplementary SCC 204 and (ii) Unreported decision of this court dated 7.3.2001 Tamil Nadu State Transport and Transport Corporation Retired Employees Association represented by its General Secretary R.Govindaraj - vs. - State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary to Government Finance Department, Madras and 8 others (W.P.No.21204 of 1992). 5. The said G.O.Ms.No.110 Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 was considered by this court in W.P.No.482 of 2008 and para 10 of the said G.O. was set aside. The family pension was extended to the petitioner in that case from the date of death of the employee and not from the date 7.3.2001. Respondent was directed to grant family pension from the date of death of the employee. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:- "12. In such view of the matter, clause-10 of the G.O.Ms.No.110, Transport Department, dated 06.06.2002 in so far as it fixes the effective date as 07.03.2001 is set aside. The petitioner in this case will be entitled to family pension under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, from the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ date following the date of death of the pensioner/ employee, viz., 28.10.1994 and not from the date as specified in para 10 of the G.O.Ms.No.110 Transport Department dated 6.6.2002. If any application is required, petitioner shall submit the same within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders in terms of the order of this court for family pension within a period of four weeks from the date of such application. This writ petition is allowed. No costs." 6. Following the earlier decision of this Court in W.P.No.482 of 2008, wherein Para 10 of the G.O.Ms.No.110 Transport Department dated 6.6.2002 has been set aside, the petitioner will be entitled to the same relief. Accordingly, the petitioner in this case will be entitled to family pension under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, from the date following the date of death of the pensioner/employee, viz., 16.4.1998 and not from the date as specified in para 10 of the G.O.Ms.No.110 Transport Department dated 6.6.2002. If any application is required, petitioner shall submit the same within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders in terms of the order of this court granting family pension within a period of four weeks from the date of such application. This writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To The Secretary to Government, Transport Department, Secretariat,Chennai-9. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.26632 1 cc To Mr.C.Manohar, Advocate, SR.25979 W.P.No.25536 of 2007 PKB(CO) SRA(30/7/2009) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/