IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.30745 of 2010 Between: Smt. G.Nagamani … Petitioner And Osmania University, Rep.by its Registrar, Tarnaka, Hyderabad. … Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.30745 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring inaction on the part of the respondent in releasing the pension and the retirement beneﬁts relating to the petitioner’s husband late Sri Anjaiah, in spite of declaring her as legally wedded wife of said Anjaiah vide judgment and decree in O.S. No.6565 of 200, dated 16.04.2008 on the ﬁle of the XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondent to release the pension, retirement and terminal beneﬁts including other monetary benefits of her husband. Brief facts of the case are that the claim of the petitioner is that she is the legally wedded wife of late Sri Anjaiah, who worked as a Driver in the respondent’s university and opted voluntary retirement due to his ill- health and later expired on 16.08.2004 leaving behind the petitioner and two children, one son and one daughter. Subsequent to death of Sri Anjaiah, the petitioner approached the respondent claiming the beneﬁts but she came to know that in the service register of late Sri Anjaiah, the name of one Prameela is found as nominee of late Sri Anjaiah. Therefore, she filed O.S. No.6565 of 2004 against the respondent and the said Prameela, on the ﬁle of the XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, seeking to declare her and her children as the legal heirs of late Sri Anjaiah and also for deletion of the name of the said Prameela from the service register. Thereafter, the learned Junior Civil Judge vide judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 declared the petitioner and her children as the legal heirs of late Sri Anjaiah. As there was no appeal against the said judgement and decree, the same became final. While things stood thus, the petitioner approached the respondent and communicated the copy of the said judgment and decree with a request to release the beneﬁts of her husband in her name. As there was no action on the part of the respondent, she gave a reminder on 27.01.2010 to the respondent (Disbursing Oﬃcer) and also got issued a legal notice dated 03.04.2010 with a request to forthwith release the pension and other monetary beneﬁts of her husband but in vain. Hence, she filed the present writ petition. On behalf of the respondent, counter aﬃdavit has been ﬁled, inter alia, stating that lat Sri Anjaiah was permitted to retire voluntarily with eﬀect from 30.06.2003 and according to the pension papers submitted by him, Smt. Prameela was nominated for receiving the family pension. Therefore, the respondent paid family pension to Smt.Prameela. After receipt of a copy of the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 passed in O.S. No.6565 of 2004, payment of family pension to Smt. Prameela was stopped and thereafter, the same has not been paid either to the petitioner or to Smt. Prameela since Smt. Prameela filed an appeal in A.S. No.89 of 2008 before the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the said judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 and the same is pending. Hence, the family pension along with other beneﬁts could not be paid to the petitioner until the said appeal is decided. In response to the counter, the petitioner ﬁled reply stating that an appeal in A.S. No.189 of 2008 was ﬁled against the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 passed in O.S. No.6565 of 2004 and the said appeal was dismissed for default for non payment of process on 30.06.2009 and no appeal is pending against the said judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife and the same has been declared by the learned Judge in O.S. No.6565 of 2004, ﬁled by the petitioner, vide judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008. It is also submitted that though the said Prameela filed an appeal (not A.S. No.89 of 2008 but it is A.S. No.189 of 2008) in A.S. No. 189 of 2008 against the said judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008, the same was dismissed for default for non payment of process. Therefore, the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 became ﬁnal and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to receive family pension along with other beneﬁts of her husband late Sri Anjaiah. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent’s university would submit that because in the records it was found the name of Smt.Prameela as nominee of late Sri Anjaiah and on her claim, she was paid family pension but thereafter, on receipt of judicial order, the same has been stopped. It is also submitted that as an appeal preferred by Smt. Prameela against the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 passed in O.S. No.6565 of 2004 and the same is pending, no benefits have been paid to the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent’s University and perused the material on record. As could be seen from the material placed before this Court, the petitioner ﬁled suit in O.S. No.6565 of 2004 seeking for declaration of her status and other beneﬁts and also for deletion of name of Smt. Prameela from the service record of late Sri Anjaiah, husband of the petitioner. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner and aggrieved by which, Smt. Prameela preferred an appeal in A.S. No.189 of 2008 and the same was dismissed on 30.06.2009 for default for non payment of process. Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appeal in A.S. No.189 of 2008 preferred by Smt. Prameela was already dismissed long back on 30.06.2009 and the said Prameela did not take any further steps in the said appeal, therefore, the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2008 became ﬁnal and the petitioner is entitled to family pension and other beneﬁts, this writ petition can be disposed of with the following direction. The respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for releasing the family pension and other beneﬁts, taking into consideration the legal proceedings mentioned hereinabove, and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 02.12.2011 LSK