JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the 1st respondent, relating to the impugned order dated 06.12.2014, bearing Ref.No. Admn.Ku.Or.No.1192-3/SE/CEDC/Cud/Admn3/U2/Ko.KAT/2014, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 & 2 to disburse the pension and arrears of pension with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of his superannuation i.e. from 31.01.2010.) 1. The information provided by the Superintending Engineer in proceedings dated 06.12.2014 is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition. 2. The writ petitioner states that he was working as a Foreman in the TANGEDCO and he was allowed to retire from service on 31.01.2010. The petitioner states that he participated in the Lok Adalat proceedings and consented to give his commuted portion of the pension to the third respondent, who is none other than his daughter. The Award of the Lok Adalat passed on 24.03.2010 reads as under:- "2. The petitioner and the respondents are present with their respective counsel. Compromise talk was initiated by this forum. Ultimately, the following settlement has been reached between the parties. i) It seems, barring commuted pension all other retiral benefits have been already disbursed to the third respondent as reported by the respondents 1 and 2. Therefore, it is agreed by all the parties that the commuted pension shall be deposited in the name of the unmarried daughter of the petitioner and the third respondent by name Elakiya Rani who is doing her 1st B.Sc., Nursing. Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the same. ii) It is informed by parties concerned that the third respondent, has so far not given any option to receive family pension. It is agreed by the parties that since the petitioner is the lawfully wedded wife of the third respondent, the third respondent hereby states that the petitioner may be nominated to receive family pension. Accordingly, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to enter the name of the petitioner as wife and nominee for receiving family pension in the official records. iii) The petitioner and the third respondent agree to live together and resume co-habitation from now onwards. 3. Accordingly, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to enter the name of the petitioner as wife and nominee for receiving family pension in the official records. iii) The petitioner and the third respondent agree to live together and resume co-habitation from now onwards. 3. In view of the settlement between the parties, it is agreed by both sides that M.C.No.2 of 2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ulundurpet shall stand disposed of withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh application for maintenance in case any misunderstanding arises between the parties in future and the third respondent fails to maintain his wife. 4. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ulundurpet is directed to dispose of M.C.No.2 of 2009 as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition if exigency arise." 3. The petitioner had settled the commuted portion of his terminal benefits in view of the Award passed in the Lok Adalat and accordingly, the third respondent/daughter was the beneficiary. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the third respondent is now not taking care of the petitioner and his wife. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent authority to settle the benefits in his favour. The authorities have declined his request on the ground that the commuted pension awarded was settled through Lok Adalat and they cannot overturn the same. 5. This Court is of the considered opinion that there are several disputes between the family members and the petitioner himself has admitted the same in paragraph 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, which reads as under:- "5. I sincerely state that as stated above, I have 4 sons and 2 daughters in which, one daughter and three sons were already got married. Their marriages were arranged one and all the expenditures borne out only by me. While being so, my elder daughter by name, Sheela married to one Siva. But unfortunately my wife has got illegal intimacy with him due to which, they planned and murdered my daughter Sheela. When questioned the same by me and one of my sons Mr.Rangarajulu, immediately she filed a maintenance case as against me in M.C.No.2 of 2009 before the Judicial Magistrate I, Ulundurpet with complete false and frivolous allegations. Immediately we were thrown out from my own house. When questioned the same by me and one of my sons Mr.Rangarajulu, immediately she filed a maintenance case as against me in M.C.No.2 of 2009 before the Judicial Magistrate I, Ulundurpet with complete false and frivolous allegations. Immediately we were thrown out from my own house. In fact, the said house was constructed by me and had comprised of two floors with 8 bedrooms. I borrowed private loans and loan from my office and constructed the said house. Even then, we were thrown out and presently I am living with one of my sons at Neyveli." 6. In view of the above disputes between the family members, this Court cannot adjudicate those issues in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such disputed issues are to be resolved by approaching the competent forum and as far as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, it is covered under the Award passed by the Lok Adalat, which is implemented by the competent authorities. 7. Thus, this Court does not find any infirmity in respect of the impugned communication sent to the petitioner, which is not independent but based on the Award of the Lok Adalat and hence, the same cannot now be overturned by this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.