Judgment : This writ petition is filed to call for the records relating to the proceedings made In Na.Ka. No. 1046/04, dated 5.10.2004 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents 2 and 3 to re-submit the pension papers to the first respondent and consequently direct the first respondent to sanction family pension to the legal heirs of the deceased Late S. Banumathi, who worked as Assistant in the office of the 3rd respondent. 2. One Banumathi, who was working as nursing assistant in the third respondent centre died on 12.1.2002 in harness. Her husband Mani pre-deceased her on 8.11.1998. The couple left behind two minor children. One Deepanraj born on 8.11.1991 and Indira born on 1.11.1994. The said Banumathi, who was suffering from chronic asthma (sic) and realising that she may not live long, executed a registered Will dated 2.1.2002, for the benefit of the minor children, which is registered as document No. 1 of 2002 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Sirkazhi, bequeathing all her properties in favour of two minor children and appointing the petitioner S. Sekar, her brother as guardian of the minor children. 3. The petitioner was also appointed as nominee in the service records to receive all the service benefits in the event of her death. After the death of Banumathi, it is not in dispute that the DCRG, GPF, SPF etc. were given to the petitioner. The respondents however did not grant the benefit of family pension to the two minor children. The petitioner made an application for family pension. By the impugned notice dated 5.10.2004, the third respondent informed the petitioner that the first respondent returned the pension papers for want of guardianship certificate from the civil Court. Hence, the petitioner was directed to submit guardianship certificate and after receipt of guardianship certificate, the pension papers will be resubmitted to the first respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Mr. G. Ethirajulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the guardian of the two minor children consequent to the registered Will as above. Therefore, he is the guardian as defined under Section 4 Clause (2) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Mr. G. Ethirajulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the guardian of the two minor children consequent to the registered Will as above. Therefore, he is the guardian as defined under Section 4 Clause (2) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. The respondents-authorities have accepted the Will and released all the service benefits except family pension to the benefit of the two minor children and therefore, for grant of family pension, there should be no impediment and therefore prayed for an order as prayed for. 5. Mr. B. Vijay, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 on instructions submitted that for the purpose of issuance of family pension, the petitioner should be a guardian appointed or declared by a Court keeping in mind the Rule 46 of the Tamil Nadu1 Pension Rules. 6. Having considered the rival submissions, this Court is not inclined to accept the plea of the respondents 2 and 3 for the following reasons. (i) Grant of family pension is covered by Rule 49 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978. Whereas, Rule 46 relates to payment of gratuity. Therefore, the respondents plea is not tenable. Rule 49 Clause 6(iii) of the Pension Rules reads as follows: “Rule 49(6)(iii) the family pension shall be paid to such son or daughter through the guardian as if he or she were a minor.” 7. The family pension is payable in a case of son till he attains the age of 25 years and in a case of unmarried daughter, until she attains the age of 25 years or she gets married, which ever is earlier. 8. Section 4(b)(ii) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act defines a guardian as follows: “a guardian appointed by the Will of the minor’s father or mother.” 9. The petitioner has been appointed as guardian as per the registered Will and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to act as guardian in the interest of the minor children. This is fortified in Section 9(3) and (5) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. The petitioner has been appointed as guardian as per the registered Will and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to act as guardian in the interest of the minor children. This is fortified in Section 9(3) and (5) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. The power of the Guardian so appointed by a Will is no way different from the natural guardian could be seen from Section 9(3) and (5) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and the same is set out hereunder: “Section 9(3) A Hindu widow entitled to act as the natural guardian of her minor legitimate children, and a Hindu mother entitled to act as the natural guardian of her minor legitimate children by reason of the fact that the father has become disentitled to act as such, may, by Will, appoint a guardian for any of them in respect of the minor’s person or in respect of the minor’s property (other than the undivided interest referred to in Section 12) or in respect of both. … … 9(5) The guardian so appointed by Will has the right to act as the minor’s guardian after the death of the minor’s father or mother, as the case may be, and to exercise all the rights of a natural guardian under this Act to such extent and subject to such restrictions, if any, as are specified in this Act and in the Will.” 10. The petitioner consequent to the Will is entitled to act as guardian of the minor and seek all benefits that are due to the minors. The need for a civil Court order does not arise as the language of the provision of law does not require such a declaration. The respondents plea is therefore untenable and erroneous. In such view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to seek family pension in respect of two minor children and the authorities are not entitled to raise the plea that the petitioner should obtain a specific Court order appointing him as guardian, such requirement is contrary to the provisions of law as above. The respondents are therefore directed to process the application for grant of family pension to the minor children. 11. It is now stated that the son, who was a minor at the time of filing the application has now attained the age of majority. The respondents are therefore directed to process the application for grant of family pension to the minor children. 11. It is now stated that the son, who was a minor at the time of filing the application has now attained the age of majority. The authorities are entitled to deal with the case of the major son in accordance with law. The case of minor daughter will be considered for grant family pension as per petitioner’s application. The authorities are directed to process the same within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2007 is closed. No costs.