IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 10.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.No.49381 of 2006 Mrs.M.Alamelu .. Petitioner vs 1. The Deputy Secretary to Government, Finance (Pension) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai -9. 2.The Principal Accountant General (Tamil Nadu), (Accounts and Entitlements), Teynampet, Chennai 18. .. Respondents The Original Application No.4879 of 2001 has been filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and after abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred to this Court and renumbered as writ petition seeking relief to call for the records on the file of the Deputy Secretary to Government, Finance (Pension) Department the first respondent herein in his Proceedings No.Letter No.30413/Pension/2000-3, dated 15.5.2001 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, being violative of rules and Principles of Natural Justice thereby direct the respondents to pay the arrears of family pension from April 1979 to 14.6.1993 with all monetary benefits. For Petitioner ... Mr.A.R.Suresh For 1st Respondent ... Mr.V.Subbiah Special Govt. Pleader For 2nd Respondent ... Mr.V.Vijay Shankar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R The petitioner's husband was employed in the Public Works Department as Chowkidar and he died on 28.6.1953 while he was in service. 2.The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.749, Finance (Pay Commission), dated 26.5.1979 sanctioning flat rate of family pension of Rs.100/- p.m. to the families of employees who have died in harness and who are not covered under the New Family Pension Rules, 1964. The flat rate of family pension of Rs.100/- p.m. was to be paid with effect from 1.4.1979 to those families as per G.O.Ms.No.748, Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.5.1979. 3.The petitioner was sanctioned family pension as per G.O.Ms.No.621, Public (Maintenance Department), dated 15.6.1993. From the date of issuance of the G.O., a sum of Rs.375/- p.m. was sanctioned as family pension from 15.6.1993. 4.The petitioner filed Original Application No.1484 of 2000 seeking family pension from 1.4.1979 as per G.O.Ms.No.748, Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.5.1979. The Tribunal passed an order dated 11.01.2001 directing the Finance (Pension) Department, Tamil Nadu Government to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 26.12.2000 claiming family pension as per G.O.Ms.No.748 Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.5.1979 with effect from 1.4.1979. 5.The first respondent passed the impugned order dated 15.5.2001 rejecting the claim of the petitioner stating that the service records of the husband of the petitioner were not available and therefore, family pension was granted based on the statement of his co-worker one Thiru V.Audhimoolam with effect from 15.6.1993. 6.Hence, the petitioner filed Original Application No.4879 of 2001 (W.P.No.49381 of 2006) to quash the aforesaid order dated 15.5.2001 of the first respondent and for a direction to pay family pension with effect from 1.4.1979 as per G.O.Ms.No.748 Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.5.1979. 7.The first respondent has filed the reply affidavit refuting the allegations. 8.The crux of the averments is that since no service records of the husband of the petitioner were available, the family pension was paid with effect from 15.6.1993 based on the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ statement of Thiru V.Adhimoolam who was a co worker to the husband of the petitioner. 9.I have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. 10.It is not in dispute that the husband of the petitioner died on 28.6.1953. The first respondent has also admitted the fact that he was in service in Public Works Department. At the time of death of the petitioner's husband, there was no Rule that provides for family pension. In such circumstances, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.748 Finance (Pay Commission), dated 26.5.1979 providing flat rate of family pension of Rs.100/- p.m with effect from 1.4.1979 to the families of employees, who died while in service and who are not covered under Family Pension Rule 1964. When the petitioner claimed family pension as per G.O.Ms.No.748, the petitioner was given family pension only with effect from 15.6.1993, as per G.O.Ms.No.621, Public (Maintenance Department), dated 15.6.1993 on the sole ground that the service records were not available. 11.In my view that when the Government accepted the employment of the husband of the petitioner in Public Works Department and decided to sanction family pension, they should have sanctioned family pension as per G.O.Ms.No.748 Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.5.1979 and the reason for not granting family pension with effect from 1.4.1979 is not acceptable to me. 12.At this juncture, it is relevant to state the recommendation of the second respondent dated 17.9.1993. The said recommendation is extracted hereunder: "Kindly refer to the G.O. cited, Family Pension at Rs.375/- p.m from the date of the above Government order has been sanctioned to Smt.M.Alamelu Ammal wife of Late S.Munusamy, formerly chowkidar in your department who died on 28.6.1953, while in service. The family pension has been granted to her under G.O.Ms.No.748 Fin (Pen) Department dated 26.5.1979. In this connection, I am to state that since the date of death of the Government servant is 28.6.53, she is eligible for a family pension of Rs.482/- p.m and as per G.O.Ms.No.740 she is entitled to the family pension w.e.f. 1.4.79 at the following rates. i) Rs.100/- p.m from 1.4.79 to 31.3.82 ii)Rs.125/- p.m from 1.4.82 to 30.9.84 iii)Rs.261/- p.m from 1.10.84 to 31.5.88 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and iv)Rs.482/- p.m from 1.6.88 onwards. Dearness Allowance on Family Pension as admissible from time to time. The above facts may kindly be examined and necessary amendment to G.O.Ms.No.62/ dated 15.6.93 may be issued. However to avoid harship to the pensioner family pension Rs.375/- p.m from 15.6.93 as per the Government Order is being authorised to her separately". 13.The second respondent recommended to the Public Works Department for payment of family pension with effect from 1.4.1979. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order dated 15.5.2001 passed by the first respondent is quashed and the first respondent is directed to pay family pension as recommended by the second respondent within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 14.The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar. cla 1. The Deputy Secretary to Government, Finance (Pension) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai -9. 2.The Principal Accountant General (Tamil Nadu), (Accounts and Entitlements), Teynampet, Chennai 18. 1 cc to Mr.S. Srinivasan, Advocate, Sr. 75690 1 cc to Mr.V. Vijayshankar, Advocate, Sr. 75764 1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr. 75738 W.P.No.49381 of 2006 EV (CO) kk 5/1 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/