1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2011 CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD)No.7709 of 2011 K.Kalavathi ... Petitioner Versus 1. The District Collector, Theni District, Theni. 2. The Block Development Officer, Theni Panchayat Union, Theni. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writs of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to pay Rs.14,000/- with interest from the date of eligibility till realisation with cost. For Petitioners .. Mr.Veerakathiravan For Respondents .. Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader O R D E R The petitioner has sought for a Mandamus, directing the second respondent to pay Rs.14,000/- with interest from the date of eligibility till realization, with cost. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that after the death of her husband, Mrs.Saroja, first wife of her husband, made a claim to withdraw the retirement benefits, due and payable to the deceased. At this juncture, the petitioner made objections, stating that she is also entitled to half of the amount. Therefore, both the petitioner and the first wife of the deceased, Mrs.Saroja, were directed to make applications before the District and Sessions Court, for issuance of Succession Certificate, for claiming death benefits. 3. In the proceedings initiated before the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, in Succession O.P.No.8 of 1993, for grant of succession certificate, the first wife was declared as eligible for a sum of Rs.45,000/- and the petitioner was eligible to receive a sum of Rs.14,000/-. Succession Certificate was also granted in I.A.No.140 of 1993 in Succession O.P.No.8 of 1993, dated 01.11.1993. At the time of death of the deceased, sons of the petitioner were minors, aged 14 and 9 years respectively. As she was in financial constraint, she could not provide education to them. 4. Even after the production of the succession certificate, the respondents have not disbursed the death benefits of the petitioner's husband. Therefore, the first wife of the deceased, viz., Mrs.Saroja, filed W.P.(MD)No.1616 of 2007, seeking for a direction to pay the death benefits and that the same was allowed on 20.03.2007. Being aggrieved by the same, the Block Development Officer, Theni Panchayat Union, Theni, second respondent herein, has filed W.A.(MD)No.418 of 2007, and that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 same was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 23.07.2008. Thereafter, a sum of Rs.45,000/- was paid to the first wife of the deceased, viz., Mrs.Saroja. However, the amount ordered to be paid to the petitioner was not paid, despite several representations. Being aggrieved by the same, she made a representation on 27.03.2011 and it remains unanswered. Hence, the present writ petition. 5. The respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. However, the learned Additional Government Pleader made submissions for dismissal of the writ petition. 6.Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner is the second wife of the deceased. In I.A.No.140 of 1993 in Succession O.P.No.8 of 1993 filed by the petitioner and her two minor sons, the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, by an order, dated 01.11.1993, has issued a certificate, empowering the petitioner to collect a sum of Rs.14,000/- (out of Rs.60,300/-). 8. In W.P.(MD)No.1616 of 2007, the first wife of the deceased had claimed disbursement of Rs.46,300/- with interest from the date of eligibility till realization, with costs, on the basis of the succession certificate issued in the above Succession O.P., on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam. Though the Commissioner of Theni Panchayat Union, has forwarded a letter to the Block Development Officer, Theni Panchayat Union, to disburse the said amount, it was not granted. She seemed to have made a representation to the Hon'ble Chief Minister Cell. In the said writ petition also, no counter affidavit has been filed. In such circumstances, this Court, by an order, dated 20.03.2007, has allowed the writ petition, with a direction to the respondents therein to make payment of Rs.46,300/-, as per the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, in Succession O.P.No.8 of 1993, dated 01.11.1993, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, from the date of issuance of the Succession Certificate till the payment is made. 9. When the Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Theni Panchayat Union, Theni, second respondent herein, has filed an appeal in W.A.(MD)No.418 of 2007, a Division Bench of this Court has dismissed the writ appeal on 23.07.2008. Perusal of the said order shows that insofar as payment of Rs.14,000/- allotted to the petitioner herein is concerned, there was no representation before Division Bench. At Paragraph 4, the Division Bench has observed as follows: "4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant is now raising the question entitlement of the writ petitioner/widow to the aforesaid amount. It is nobody's case that there was anybody to claim the said amount. In the order of the Commissioner, Theni Panchayat Union, dated 04.01.1994 itself a sum of Rs.14,000/- was allotted to one Kalavathi, who claimed to be the 2nd wife of the said Kulanthaivelu, from the total amount of Rs.60,300/-. There is no representation before us on behalf of the 2nd wife of the deceased employee." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 10. Subsequently, when the order of the Division Bench was not complied with, Mrs.K.Saroja, first wife of the deceased, has filed Contempt Petition in Cont.P.(MD)No.619 of 2009 and when the matter came up for hearing on 15.12.2009, learned Government Advocate was directed to take notice and on instructions, it was submitted that on 10.03.2010, a sum of Rs.46,300/- had already been deposited before the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam. Recording the said submission, this Court, by an order, dated 21.09.2010, has directed the petitioner therein to make out an application for disbursement of the said amount. The order sent by the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Theni, to the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, enclosing the cheque for the amount, as well as the information that the money had been deposited, has been placed before this Court. Since the order made by this Court had been complied with, the Contempt Petition was closed. 11. Thus, it is evident that there is no objection for disbursement of a sum of Rs.14,000/- to the petitioner. Perusal of the Division Bench order shows that the Commissioner, Theni Panchayat Union, vide its order, dated 04.01.1994, has already allotted a sum of Rs.14,000/- to the petitioner, from the total amount of Rs.60,300/-. As the entitlement of the petitioner has not been disputed, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to make payment of Rs.14,000/-, as per the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, from 01.11.1993, till the payment is made. The said amount has to be paid within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Collector, Theni District, Theni. 2. The Block Development Officer, Theni Panchayat Union, Theni. +1. CC to Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Advocate, SR.No. 23908 skm W.P.No.(MD)7709 of 2011 19.07.2011 TR : 20.09.2011: 3p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/