Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 831 (MAD)

Anusuya v. Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai

2006-03-24

N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR

body2006
Judgment :- The prayer in the writ petition is for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to disburse the petitioner's father late V. Munusamy's death benefit, terminal benefits such as provident fund, gratuity and other incidental benefits. 2. The petitioner is the daughter of the, deceased Munusamy who died on 30.4.1991 while in service of the respondent Corporation as Watchman in Zone III. According to the petitioner herein, her mother pre-deceased her father and the petitioner after her father's death was left as an orphan with one younger brother and sister and at that time the petitioner was only nineteen years of age with younger brother aged ten years named Shanmugam and younger sister aged eight years named Navaneetham. Only the petitioner's relatives are giving a helping hand to the petitioner and other children of the deceased. 3. According to the petitioner, she applied to the respondent herein for compassionate appointment on 3.10.1991 and the same is acknowledged on 9.10.1991 by the respondent. Petitioner's uncle M. Subramaniam submitted a representation on 26.8.1994 on, behalf of the petitioner and other minor brother and sister of the petitioner and requested the Zonal Officer, No.3, Chennai Corporation, to sanction the terminal benefits of the deceased V. Munusamy and also prayed for appointment of the petitioner herein on compassionate appointment. He also sent a reminder on 26.9.1994. 4. The petitioner having not received any reply the either for her representation or to the representation of her uncle submitted a further representation on 4.5.1998, and requested to give compassionate appointment followed with a further representation to the Mayor of the Corporation on 5.5.1998 along with the death certificate, of the petitioner's father, legal heir certificate and requested for compassionate appointment. The petitioner also submitted application for sanction of family pension on 9.4.1998 in the prescribed form for which the Accounts Officer (pension), Chennai Corporation, sent a reply stating that the petitioner should produce a certificate that she is not married. On 22.1.1998, the petitioner sent a counsel notice and requested the respondent herein to pay the terminal benefits and grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner. In the said notice, the petitioner's counsel also informed that on failure to pay the terminal benefits as stated above, appropriate legal action will be taken. The respondent herein sanctioned Life Insurance Corporation benefits to the petitioner, her brother and sister for Rs.13,334 each. In the said notice, the petitioner's counsel also informed that on failure to pay the terminal benefits as stated above, appropriate legal action will be taken. The respondent herein sanctioned Life Insurance Corporation benefits to the petitioner, her brother and sister for Rs.13,334 each. No further benefit is given to the petitioner and to other persons of the petitioner's family, viz., the petitioner's brother and sister. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with a prayer for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to disburse the petitioner's father's death benefit, terminal benefits such as family pension, provident fund, gratuity And other incidental benefits. 5. This Court directed the standing counsel of the Corporation to take notice on 23.1.2006 and the case was posted on 10.3.2006 before me and again on 11.3.2006 and today. No counter is filed by the respondent. 6. In view of the said facts stated above and taking into account of the pitiable condition of the petitioner, her brother and sister, the respondent cannot keep quiet without passing orders on the eligible benefits payable to the petitioner, who are the legal heirs of the deceased V. Munusamy, who was having more than eleven years of service at the time of death as the petitioner’s father, in the year 1991. The father of the petitioner was employed as a watchman in Unit VIII, Zone-III of the respondent Corporation and eligible to get all benefits as he was a permanent employee. It is to be seen that the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in the year 1991 itself i.e., on 3.10.1991, immediately after the death of the petitioner’s father on 30.4.1991. No order of appointment of compassionate ground is given to the petitioner even though she is the only eligible candidate available because, the petitioner’s brother and sister are minors. Apart from that, death benefit payable to the petitioner is not paid to the petitioner and the legal heirs of the deceased V. Munusamy, family pension from 1.5.1991. The counsel notice was also issued to the respondent on 22.1.1998 by registered post, with acknowledgement due and the respondent cannot deny the receipt of the said counsel notice. 7. Apart from that, death benefit payable to the petitioner is not paid to the petitioner and the legal heirs of the deceased V. Munusamy, family pension from 1.5.1991. The counsel notice was also issued to the respondent on 22.1.1998 by registered post, with acknowledgement due and the respondent cannot deny the receipt of the said counsel notice. 7. Therefore, I am of the view that interests of justice will be met by directing the respondent herein, to sanction the death benefit, family pension and other benefits, family pension and other benefits such as provident fund, gratuity and other incidental benefits payable to the petitioner, the legal heirs of late V. Munusamy from January 1992 with 12% interest. 8. It is to be noted that the petitioner was made to suffer inspite of her eligibility to get compassionate appointment. The terminal benefits payable are delayed indefinitely and the respondent has violated decent life to the petitioner, her younger brother and sister which is in violation of Art.21 of the Constitution of India. Since, the action of the respondent is totally arbitrary and shows the lethargic attitude and failure of its duty, I am ordering interest in this writ petition not only on the ground that the petitioner is entitled to get interest as per the Government Order but also on the ground of lack of response on the part of the respondent in meeting the genuine-claims of the petitioner for about 15 years. Regarding the compassionate ground appointment, the application submitted by the petitioner on 3.10.1991 followed with counsel notice dated 22.1.1998 shall be considered on merits and in accordance with law as are available as on 3.10.1991 and the amount payable to the petitioner, her brother and her sister shall be paid with interest as stated above, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Writ petition is allowed with above directions. No costs.