IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10315 of 2008 Between: Boini Eswaramma, W/o. Late Ramulu, R/o. Digwal Village, Kohir Mandal, Medak District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent Engineer, A.P. Transco, A.P.C.P.D.C.L., Sangareddy, Medak District. 2 The Divisional Engineer, A.P. Transco, A.P.C.P.D.C.L., Sangareddy, Medak District. ..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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for payment of Rs.1,000/- per month w.e.f. in the month of December , 2007 from the family pension payable on the account of the death of her husband late Boini Ramulu in terms of the award passed by the Hon'ble lok Adalath, Sangareddy in Case No.9105/2007 dated 17-12-2007 by duly considering the representation dated 10-03.2008 and legal notice dated 11.04.2008 as illegal, unlawful, contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to consider her case for payment of Rs.1,000/- per month from the family pension payable on the account of death of Late Ramulu w.e.f. December, 2007 in terms of the award of Lok Adalath and same may be credited to SB Account No.30291 of UCO Bank , Sangareddy, Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner claims to be the wife of late Ramulu, who retired from the service of A.P.C.P.D.C.L. He was drawing pension after retirement. The petitioner claims to have approached Lok Adalat, Sangareddy, making claim against Ramulu. An award is said to have been passed on 17.12.2007, where under, the said Ramulu was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,000/- into the account of the petitioner in UCO Bank of Sangareddy. Ramulu died on 28.2.2008. Petitioner made a representation dated 10.3.2008 to the 2nd respondent, with a prayer to deduct a sum of Rs.1,000/- from the benefits payable to Ramulu, or to the legal representatives, and deposit the same into her account. Her grievance is that the respondents have not passed any orders on her representation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Even assuming that the petitioner had derived any right under the award, dated 17.12.2007, passed by the Lok Adalat, she cannot enforce the same, vis-à-vis the respondents. It is not known as to whether any family pension is payable, consequent on the death of Ramulu. Even if it is payable, the petitioner cannot seek deduction of any amount, on the basis of the said award. On the other hand, she can work out her remedies independently, against the estate of the said Ramulu, if it is otherwise permissible in law. The writ petition is disposed of, with the above observation. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ 2nd May 2008 PAN