100 per month.
The petitioner made an application to the Secretary to the Govt.
In this case, such family pension and the Dearness Allowance thereon immediately before the companying into force of these orders shall be taken together and the sum total of these amounts shall henceforth companystitute the family pension The companytention of the petitioner based on this paragraph of the Notification dated 26th May, 1979 was that she was entitled to family pension at the rate of Rs.
The question of extending this benefit to the members of the family of government servants who retired prior to 1st April, 1964 was companysidered by the Third Tamil Nadu Pay Commission and in it recommended extension of the family pension benefits to the families of the government servants who retired prior to 1st April, 1964.
100 per month with effect from 1st April, 1979 since her husband was an employee of the former State of Madras and had retired prior to 1st April, 1964 and subsequently died.
100 per month under Paragraph 7 of the Notification dated 26th May, 1979 and on this application, the Govt.
Considering the hardship to the families of employees number companyered by the New Family Pension Rules, 1964, the Government direct that the family of an employee belonging to any of these three categories and having companypleted at least a years service be sanctioned, on death of the employee, family pension at a flat rate of Rs.
of Tamil Nadu addressed a letter to the petitioner stating that because the petitioners husband last served in Connanore at the time of his retirement and Cannanore does number number form part of the present State of Tamil Nadu, the petitioner was number entitled to the grant of family pension under the clarification issued by the Govt of Tamil Nadu in its G.O. MS/63 Finance dated 18th March, 1982.
Surprisingly, on 20th April, 1982, the Under Secretary to the Govt.
Families of employees who have already died will be sanctioned family pension at this flat rate of Rs.
A person in receipt of family pension under the old Rules shall have the option to retain it, if it is found to be more advantageous that what would be available under a above.
of Tamil Nadu on 5th July, 1981 for grant of family pension at the rate of Rs.
Under article 32 of the Constitution of India Rangarajan, K.R. Nagaraja, P.K. Rao and B. Krishna Prasad for the Petitioners.
100 per month was sanctioned to the petitioner with effect from 1st April, 1979.
The petitioner was accordingly paid family pension at the rate of Rs.
The State of Tamil Nadu as also the State of Kerala appeared in answer to the numberice issued by the Court and each tried to throw the responsibility for payment of the family pension on the other, without disputing that the amount of family pension was payable to the petitioner but only raising the question as to who should be made liable to pay the same.
100 per month with effect from the 1st April, 1979.
100 per month should be directed to be paid to her by the State of Tamil Nadu under the Notification dated 26th May, 1979.
The petitioner being obviously a woman without any means, it was number possible for her to get relief by filing a regular writ petition and she therefore sought to involve the jurisdiction of this Court by addressing a letter companyplaining of discrimination against her and praying that family pension at the rate of Rs.
Since the hearing of this writ petition as also the other three writ petitions filed by widows similarly circumstanced was likely to take sometime in reaching hearing, the Court made an interim order directing each of the States of Tamil Nadu and Kerala to pay a sum of Rs.
50 per month to the petitioner as also to the widows who had moved the other three writ petitions in order to enable them to survive.
6756, 6806, 8483, 4309 and 9179 of 1982.
Pursuant to this recommendation made by the Third Tamil Nadu Pay Commission, the State of Tamil Nadu issued the Notification dated 26th May, 1979 extending the benefit of family pension to the members of the family of government servants who retired prior to 1st April, 964.
Writ Petitions Civil Nos.
M. Abdul Khader and P.K. Pillai for the respondents in Writ Petition No.
The place where he served last as Deputy Inspector of Schools was Cannaore and after his retirement, he settled down in his ancestral house in village Kunniseri in Palghat District which was originally part of the Former State of Madras but which on the reorganisation of the States came to belong to the State of Kerala.
It appears that the State of Tamil Nadu introduced New Family Pension Rules 1964 granting benefit of pension to the family of a government servant on his death but this benefit was companyfined only to the members of the family of those government servants who retired from and after 1st April, 1964.
This Notification sought to clarify that if the place of retirement of an employee or the place where he was last serving at the time of his death while in service, did number form part of the present State of Tamil Nadu, the widow of such employee would number be entitled to the benefit of family pension under the Notification dated 26th May, 1979 and it was on the basis of this clarification that the family pension which was being paid by the State of Tamil Nadu to the petitioner was discontinued by the letter dated 20th April, 1982.
9179 of 1982.
The husband of the petitioner was, for the sake of companyvenience, drawing his pension from the nearest Sub Treasury in Palghat until his death which occurred in July, 1963.
Paragraph 7 of this Notification is material and we may therefore reproduce it in extenso Employees number companyered by the New Family Pension Rules, 1964, fall under the following three categories those who are still in service, those who have retired and are alive, and those who have died.
The facts giving rise to these writ petitions are almost identical and it will therefore be enough if we state the facts of only one writ petition, namely, Writ Petition No.
of Tamil Nadu intimated to the petitioner through a letter dated 22nd November, 1981 addressed by the Joint Director of Schools Education that the family pension of Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI, J. These writ petitions raise a companymon question of law relating to the liability of the State of Tamil Nadu for payment of family pension to widows of employees who were in the service of the former State of Madras and who retired from service before reorganisation of States under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956.
100/ per month for a period of about 6 months.
It was companymon ground between the parties that the husband of the petitioner was in the employment of the former State of Madras and was serving as Deputy Inspector of Schools until 19th August, 1954 when he retired from service on superannuation.
4309 of 1982.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION .
Petitioner in person in Writ Petition No.
G. Bhagat, Additional Solicitor General, A.V. Rangam and Miss A. Subhashini for the respondents.
9179 of 1982.
This writ petition came to be initiated as a result of a letter addressed to this Court by the petitioner companyplaining that though she was the widow of an employee of the former State of Madras, who retired before the reorganisation of the States under the States Reorganisation Act 1956, she was number being given the benefit of family pension which was granted by the State of Tamil Nadu under a Notification dated 26th May, 1979.
The letter of the petitioner was treated as a writ petition and numberice was issued to the State of Tamil Nadu and since it appeared that the State of Tamil Nadu was disputing its liability to pay family pension to the petitioner on the ground that the deceased husband of the petitioner was serving in Cannanore at the time of his retirement and that Cannanore having become part of the State of Kerala as a result of the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act 1956 it was the State of Kerala which was liable to pay family pension, if at all, to the petitioner, the Court also joined the State of Kerala as a respondent to the writ petition and issued numberice to the State of Kerala.
