Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 712 (AP)

Chavali Ravi Kumari v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2022-08-02

KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

body2022
ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the proceedings dated 24.02.2022 of the fourth respondent returning the family pension papers of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she is the wife of late Ch. Naga Mallikarjuna Prasad, who worked as a Lineman and retired in July 2020; he used to draw his pension subsequent to his retirement and died on 12.01.2022; subsequently, petitioner obtained family member certificate on 13.04.2022 and approached the fourth respondent for grant of family pension, but the fourth respondent issued the impugned proceedings stating that the petitioner’s husband did not include her name as a nominee in his service register; during the life time of her husband, petitioner filed a case seeking maintenance and the same was ordered; petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the deceased and they do not have any children; she is entitled to receive the family pension of her late husband. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4. 4. A copy of the order dated 03.09.2019 passed in DVC No.151 of 2019 by the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, granting monthly maintenance to the petitioner is filed along with the Writ Petition and a copy of order in Crl.MP No.1652 of 2015 in MC No.17 of 2015, dated 12.01.2016 is also filed which shows that the petitioner was granted monthly maintenance. Copies of marriage certificate, family member certificate and death certificate of the petitioner’s husband are also filed along with the Writ Petition. Merely because the petitioner’s husband did not enter the name of the petitioner in the service register as his wife, the respondents cannot withhold the family pension which is due to the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the petitioner’s husband was drawing the pension. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner obtained divorce from her husband. It is also not the case of the respondents that there is a rival claimant. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to grant family pension to the petitioner. If any other third person has got any right in the family pension that would be granted pursuant to the death of Ch. It is also not the case of the respondents that there is a rival claimant. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to grant family pension to the petitioner. If any other third person has got any right in the family pension that would be granted pursuant to the death of Ch. Naga Mallikarjuna Prasad, they can initiate appropriate legal proceedings against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts which the petitioner receives from the respondents. It is made clear that this order is being passed in peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. 6. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.