IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 6008 of 2002(M) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, VIJAYALAKSHMI NIVAS, WALAYAR DAM ROAD, WALAYAR P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, * ADDL.R5 C.PARVATHY, PADATH COLONY KENNOTHPARAMBU, BEHIND CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD (IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R5 AS PER ORDER DT 27.6.03 IN IA.6398/03) GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI SRI.T.M.SUNIL FOR R5 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 6.11.2009 , THE COURT ON 06/11/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.6008/02 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE DT 11.9.01 P2 COPY OF THE LETTER DT 19.9.2000 P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DT 27.4.01 P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DT 3.11.2000 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge S. SIRI JAGAN, J. `````````````````````````````````````````````````` O.P. No. 6008 of 2002 M `````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 6th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the widow of late S.Prakash, a Head Constable under the first respondent, who died while in service on 05-03-2001. The petitioner's grievance in this original petition is that although P.F. amounts have been disbursed to her on the basis of the nomination made by S.Prakash, other terminal benefits due to late Prakash like DCRG and Commuted Value of Pension have not been disbursed to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following relief:- “ (i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondents 1 and 2 to disburse the retiral benefits due to late Prakash, Head Constable, to the petitioner, which has been sanctioned by the 4th respondent Accountant General in Ext.P4.” 2. The learned Government Pleader, with the help of a counter affidavit, submits that on enquiry, it was found that late Prakash's legally wedded wife was one Parvathy, who is still alive. Therefore, respondents 1 to 4 could not disburse the terminal OP.6008/02 : 2 : benefits due to late Prakash to the petitioner. The PF amounts were disbursed to the petitioner only because she was the nominee. In view of the counter affidavit, the petitioner has impleaded the said Parvathy as additional 5th respondent. Notice has been received by the additional 5th respondent and she appears through counsel also. However, no counter affidavit has been filed by the additional 5th respondent. In the circumstance, I am of opinion that the second respondent should decide the matter after hearing the petitioner as well as the additional 5th respondent. In the above circumstances, this original petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the eligibility of the petitioner and the additional 5th respondent to receive the terminal benefits of late Prakash and pass appropriate orders thereon, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the additional 5th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE) aks OP.6008/02 : 3 : S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````` O.P. No. 6008 of 2002 M ``````````````````````````````````````````````` J U D G M E N T 6th day of November, 2009