BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 9/3/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD) No.2733 of 2011 N. Kannathal ... Petitioner Vs The Commissioner Madurai Corporation Madurai. ... Respondent Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent herein to disburse the monetary benefits as well as the pension benefits to the petitioner pursuant to the petitioner's representations dated 19/2/2010 and 2/6/2010. For petitioner ... Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi For respondent ... Mr.M.Ravishankar O R D E R Mr.M. Ravi Shankar, takes notice for the respondent. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition praying to direct the respondent to disburse the monetary benefits as well as the pension benefits to the petitioner pursuant to the petitioner's representations dated 19/2/2010 and 2/6/2010. 4. The case of the petitioner is that, her husband viz.,Natarajan was working as Sweeper in the respondent Corporation and he retired from service on 30/6/1981 after serving 35 years. He was receiving a sum of Rs.500/- as his salary during the period of his service. He died on 3/9/1983 due to his illness. Immediately, after his death, the petitioner applied for monetary benefits such as gratuity, DCRG and Pension. Since there was delay in disbursing the said benefits by the respondent, she has filed a case before the Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, (ACL), Madurai. The said authority by an order dated 13/2/1992, directed the respondent herein to pay a sum of Rs.6,623/- towards the gratuity amount to her. Subsequently, the said amount was disbursed by the respondent to her. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. Even at that point of time, the petitioner has requested the respondent to sanction pension to her. But, however, her request was not considered. Therefore, she sent representations to the first respondent on 28/5/2009, 19/2/2010 and 2/6/2010. Since, the said representations have not been considered so far, the petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition. 6. Considering the limited scope of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, I direct the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 2/6/2010 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accts.) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.S.M.Mohangandhi, Advocate, Sr.No.5551 +1cc to Mr.M.Ravi Shankar, Advocate, Sr.No.5538 mvs ssk/06.04.2011 /4c -2p/- W.P.(MD) No.2733 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/