IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 13892 of 2008 Between: Bijani Begum Alias Zaheera Begum, W/o. Late Mohd. Khasim Occ: Widow & Household R/o.H.No.19-3-301/101, BIBI-KA- Chashma, Hyderabad-053. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Depot Manager, APSRTC, Falaknuma Depot, Engine Bowli, Hyderabad, A.P. 053. 2 Regional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Region, Office at Mahatma Gandhi Bus Station, Imliban, Hyderabad. .....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 issue a direction, order or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the representations dated 07.03.208 and 26.05.2008 and release the SRBS and PF Pension to the petitioner on the basis of Nomination-cum-Authorization and SRBS Identity Card. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.MOHD.GHOUSEUDDIN Counsel for the Respondents: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the wife of late Mohd.Khasim, who retired as a Driver from Falaknuma Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. on 16.05.2005. The employee is said to have died on 17.08.2006. The petitioner states that at the time of retirement, her husband had filed the pension papers indicating her name as next legal heir, so much so, that her photographs and thumb impressions were also taken. She states that not being aware of the death of her husband, the respondents forwarded cheques of Rs.720/- per month towards Staff Retirement Benefit Scheme (S.R.B.S.). She claims to have made representations, dated 07.03.2008 and 26.05.2008, with a request to extend her, the benefit of S.R.B.S., to reissue the cheques; and complains that no action has been taken thereon. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the record clearly discloses that the petitioner is the immediate legal heir of the deceased employee, there is no justification for the respondents in not extending the benefits. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that certain discrepancy was noticed in the legal heir certificate and the matter is under further examination. If the petitioner is the wife of the deceased employee and was nominated as legal heir, she is entitled to be extended the benefits in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. In case, the respondents entertain a doubt, they have to either seek clarification from the petitioner or to express their views without any undue delay. The benefits of the deceased employee have to be extended to one person or the other, duly examining the identity. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the representations, dated 07.03.2008 and 26.05.2008, submitted by the petitioner, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 14.07.2008. kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}