IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30281 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SALMA BEEVI V.A., VYSAMVEETTIL HOUSE, SALEEL ROAD, NATTIKA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.O.XAVIER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, COCHIN PORT TRUST, (DOCK LABOUR DIVISION), COCHIN. 2. THE COCHIN PORT TRUST, COCHIN, REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN. 3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SHIPPING, NEW DELHI. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR R3 SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R 1 & 2 SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR R1 & 2 SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.30281/2009-E ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 10th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is seeking for a direction to the first respondent to disburse the family pension to the petitioner from 18/09/1998 onwards with interest at the rate of 12% per annum till the date of payment. 2. The petitioner's case is that she was married to late Shri Kunhimohammed, who was employed under the first respondent on 18/09/1994. He expired on 18/09/1998. She submitted an application for sanction of pension and by Ext.P1 memo dated 28/08/2006, she was directed to produce various documents described therein. It is the case of the petitioner that she has already produced Exts.P2 to P14 documents before the first and second respondents and still, by Ext.P15, they are insisting for fresh details in the matter. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction by this Court to sanction family pension. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2, in paragraph (3), it is explained that there are some discrepancies in the documents produced by the petitioner and, therefore, those documents could not be taken as acceptable proof to the effect that the petitioner W.P.(C). No.30281/2009 -:2:- was married to Late Shri Kunhimohammed and was his dependent wife, making her eligible to claim family pension. In paragraph (4) it is stated that the petitioner will have to produce a Succession Certificate from the Court, having jurisdiction, and produce the same before the respondents for considering her claim for family pension. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the documents produced by the petitioner are sufficient to establish the case that she is the real claimant for family pension. So far no final orders have been communicated by the authority on the claim of the petitioner for family pension. Therefore, it is upto the second respondent to take a decision on the application after considering the documents produced by the petitioner. Appropriate action shall be taken and reply will be given to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms