IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 20283 of 1998 Between: Ch.Mangatayaramma, W/o. Late Venkatacharyulu, R/o. Anakapalli mandal, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Rep. Chairman, Visakhapatnam. 2 Sri Cheerla Alwaracharyulu, Sri Venkateswara Devasthanam, Upmaka Nakkapalli, Visakhapatnam. 3 Gopalacharyulu, Sri Venkateswara Devasthanam, Upmaka Nakkapalli, Visakhapatnam. ....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue a writ, or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring inaction of the respondents in not providing Provident Fund dues, Family Pensionary with arrears to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of service rules governing the employees of respondent organisation and consequently direct the respondent to provide Provident Fund dues, Family pension together with arrears along with other eligible dues to the Petitioner as she is the sole Class-I legal heir of the deceased husband who is the employee of the respondent herein Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following Order: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.20283 of 1998 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus against ﬁrst respondent for not paying provident fund and pension beneﬁts to the petitioner, due and payable to her husband - late Venkatacharyulu. It appears that prior their marriage, husband of the petitioner had nominated his brothers – respondent Nos.2 and 3 for the purpose of receiving terminal beneﬁts. The petitioner claims entire amount as being Class I heir of her deceased husband. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.No.309 of 1991 substantially claiming the same relief. Said writ petition was dismissed at admission stage on 21.07.1992 on the ground that the petitioner had already ﬁled O.P. for succession certiﬁcate before the District Court, Visakhapatnam, and respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein were also parties to said O.P. Thus, in view of the fact that eﬃcacious alternative remedy was availed by the petitioner, this Court felt it more appropriate to relegate the petitioner to said alternative remedy. It appears that said O.P. was returned with some oﬃce objections and the petitioner is once again before this Court in instant writ petition apparently to seek an order against respondent Nos.2 and 3 that they should not be paid any amount as said O.P. for succession is pending. First respondent ﬁled a counter pointing out that said O.P. has not been pursued after oﬃce objections were raised by the District Court, Visakhapatnam. When this writ petition was heard, the learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any ground which enables this Court to overlook said eﬃcacious alternative remedy already availed by the petitioner and to entertain this writ petition. In fact the maintainability of this writ petition was held against the petitioner by virtue of the orders in W.P.No.309 of 1991 dated 21.07.1992 referred to hereinabove. This writ petition, therefore, fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the alternative remedy, if so advised. No costs. __________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 06th September, 2009 GHN To 1 Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Rep. Chairman, Visakhapatnam. 2 Sri Cheerla Alwaracharyulu, Sri Venkateswara Devasthanam, Upmaka Nakkapalli, Visakhapatnam. 3 Gopalacharyulu, Sri Venkateswara Devasthanam, Upmaka Nakkapalli, Visakhapatnam. 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ANURADHA}