Judgment :- (S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.) Inasmuch as common question is involved for consideration and the Appeals having been preferred by common appellants, they were heard together and disposed of by this Common Judgment. 2. The husbands of both the respondents were in the service of State of Tamil Nadu and were subsequently absorbed in the State Transport Corporation. They claimed for family pension pursuant to G.O.Ms. No.171, Finance (BPE) Department, dated 23. 1989, by filing W.P. Nos.15124 and 15121 of 1993. Such relief having been granted, the present appeals came to be preferred by the authorities of the State. 3. Before deliberating on the issue viz., whether the respondents are entitled to family pension in the light of G.O. Ms. No.171, dated 21.03.1989, it is necessary to note the relevant facts involved, G.Vasantha (respondent in W.A. No.2296 of 2000) is the wife of late M.Gnanaprakasam. The said Gnanaprakasam was originally employed at the Tamil Nadu Transport Department and after formation of various Corporations, the erstwhile Tamil Nadu State Transport Department Employees were permanently absorbed in the 2nd appellant Corporation (Pallavan Transport Corporation). Accordingly, the husband of Vasantha was transferred to Pallavan Transport Corporation and since 1975, he was working therein and died in harness on 10th September, 1989. So far as Gowri Ammal (second respondent in W.A. No.2297 of 2000) is concerned, her husband late S.Purushothaman was also originally employed in the Tamil Nadu Transport Department and after formation of Corporations, he was absorbed in Pallavan Transport Corporation in 1975. He died in harness on 7th July, 1986, and his widow claimed for family pension. The appellants, who were respondents to the Writ Petitions, rejected the claim of the widows. In the case of G.Vasantha, it was pleaded by the appellants that her husband was appointed in Tamil Nadu State Transport Department on 210. 1964 on daily wages and was absorbed in regular pay scale on 1st December, 1965; thus, he rendered Government Service for a period of 9 years and five months upto 30th April, 1975. He was entitled for terminal benefits from the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Transport Department and he was paid Service Gratuity of Rs.1,659/- and death-cum-retirement gratuity of Rs.1,156/- by way of cheque dated 23.09.1988. According to the appellants, as per Government Orders issued in G.O. Ms. No.378, Finance Department, dated 18.04.1975, G.O.Ms. No.284, Finance, dated 31.03.1980, G.O. Ms. He was entitled for terminal benefits from the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Transport Department and he was paid Service Gratuity of Rs.1,659/- and death-cum-retirement gratuity of Rs.1,156/- by way of cheque dated 23.09.1988. According to the appellants, as per Government Orders issued in G.O. Ms. No.378, Finance Department, dated 18.04.1975, G.O.Ms. No.284, Finance, dated 31.03.1980, G.O. Ms. No.1028, Transport, dated 23.09.1985 and Rule 34 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, the Government Servants, who expire/retire after their permanent absorption in the Public Undertakings are not eligible for Family Pension inasmuch as they ceased to be Government Servants as on the date of their permanent absorption in the Public undertakings. Such plea was not accepted by the learned single Judge, who allowed the prayer of writ petitioner Vasantha in view of subsequent Government Order in G.O. Ms. No.171, Finance (BPE) Department, dated 21st March, 1989. Similar plea taken in the case of Gowri Ammal was accepted and the writ petition filed by her also came to be allowed. 4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions made on either side and perused the Government Orders including G.O. Ms. No.171, dated 21st March, 1989. From the above Government Order, it is quite evident that the State Government had in its mind the earlier Government Orders including G.O. Ms. No.284, Finance (CFC) Department, dated 31st March, 1980, pursuant to which, the employees, who were permanently absorbed in State Public Sector Undertakings/Boards, were not entitled to family pension as they ceased to be Government Servants on such absorption. However, after careful consideration, the State Government decided to grant family pension under the existing pension Rules as evident from G.O. Ms. No.171, dated 21st March, 1989, which reads as follows: " Government of Tamil Nadu ABSTRACT State Public Sector Undertakings/Boards -State Government Employees absorbed permanently in State Public Sector Undertakings/Boards - Death in harness - Grant of Family Pension to families of such employees - Orders issued. FINANCE (BPE) DEPARTMENT G.O. Ms. No.171, Dated: 21st March, 1989. Read:- .G.O. Ms. No.284, Finance (CFC) Department, dated 31st march 1980. ORDER:- In the Government Order read above orders were issued setting the various terminal benefits to be sanctioned to a State Government employee who opts for permanent absorption in the State public Sector Undertakings/Boards. FINANCE (BPE) DEPARTMENT G.O. Ms. No.171, Dated: 21st March, 1989. Read:- .G.O. Ms. No.284, Finance (CFC) Department, dated 31st march 1980. ORDER:- In the Government Order read above orders were issued setting the various terminal benefits to be sanctioned to a State Government employee who opts for permanent absorption in the State public Sector Undertakings/Boards. With regard to payment of Family Pension, it was clarified that the opted for permanent absorption in the State Public Sector Undertakings/Boards will ceased to be a Government Servant and as such the Governments liability for family pension will cease. The Government have considered the question of grant of family pension to the families of these Government employees who were on deputation to the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board and who are permanently absorbed there in the event of their death during their employment in the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board. 2. The Government after careful consideration have decided to grant family pension under the existing pension rules to the families of those Government employees who were/are on deputation to the State Public Sector Undertakings/Boards and who were/are permanently absorbed there, in the event of their death during their employment in the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board subject to fulfillment of the following conditions:- 1. The families of such deceased employee of the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board should not receive any other family pension including Employees Family Pension and Life Insurance Scheme. 2. If a pension Scheme is under implementation in the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board, the Government will place the required funds at the disposal of the Undertaking/Board on a prorata basis to enable them to grant the family pension to the families of such deceased employees. 3. If there is no pension scheme in the State Public Sector Undertaking/Board, the Government will bear the liability for the payment of family pension to the families of the such deceased employees of the Undertaking/Board only in respect of the services put in by the deceased employee under the Government. (By order of the Governor) " Learned single Judge, taking note of the aforesaid Government Order dated 21st March, 1989 and having found that there is no pension scheme in the public sector undertakings, which was not disputed by the learned counsel for the Corporation, allowed the Writ Petitions filed by the widows. 5. From a plain reading of G.O. Ms. 5. From a plain reading of G.O. Ms. No.171, dated 21.03.1989, it is clear that the earlier Government Orders including G.O. Ms. No.284, dated 31st March, 1980, stood superseded pursuant to the decision of the Government in G.O. No.171, dated 21st March, 1989, insofar as it relates to grant of family pension. In such circumstances, no case is made out for interfering with the orders passed by the learned single Judge. Consequently, the appellants are directed to immediately release and pay the family pension payable to the respondents herein including arrears with 8% interest per annum from the date of death of respective husbands of the widows or the date of the Government Order dated 21st March 1989, whichever is later. So far as the current family pension is concerned, the appellants shall pay the same every month as provided in the Pension Rules. Writ Appeals stand disposed of with the aforesaid directions. There shall be no order as to costs.