Vanathi vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011571772026}
Vanathi
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep by its Additional Chief Secretary,
Transport Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai 9.
2. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Madurai) Ltd,
Rep by its Managing Director,
Bye Pass Road, Madurai 625 016.
3. The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Madurai) Ltd,
Madurai Region, Madurai.
4. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporations
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Rep by its Administrator,
Thiruvalluvar Illam,
Pallavan Salai, Chennai- 2. ..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents to sanction and pay Dearness Allowance on the petitioner's
Family Pension with effect from the date of death of her husband Late
A.Gunasekaran along with arrears payable from 17.04.2026 to till the
__________
Page  1  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
date of disbursement along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
17.04.2026 to till the date of actual disbursement and further directing the
respondents to continue to pay Dearness Allowance on her family
st
pension as revised from time by the 1 respondent Government at the
rates on par with the rates of dearness allowance paid to serving
nd
employees of 2 respondent Corporation.
For Petitioner(s) :M/s A.Rahul
For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff,
Spl Government Pleader for R1
: Mr.S.C.Herold Singh,for R2 to R4
ORDER
nd
The petitioner’s husband served as a Senior Grade Driver in the 2
respondent Transport Corporation. He retired from service on 30.06.2022
and died on 17.04.2026. Therefore, the petitioner, being his wife is
receiving family pension. However, the dearness allowance, due to the
family pension, has been denied to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner
is before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus.
2.This issue has already been decided by this Court in
W.P. (MD)No.35410 of 2025, by order dated 10.12.2025. As against the
same, a writ appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation before a
Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.556 of 2026. The Division
Bench of this Court, by a Judgment dated 30.04.2026, has dismissed the
appeal in the following terms.
__________
Page  2  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
“13.It is to be noted that in the present case, the
employment of the writ petitioner was not a consequence of
the writ petitioner’s husband’s death, rather it was secured
on the writ petitioner on her own merits before the writ
petitioner’s husband's passing away. The Dearness
allowance received by the writ petitioner from her salary is
not related to the service of the Writ petitioner’s husband, it
was related to the writ petitioner’s service. In the same
way, the Dearness Allowance on the family pension is
linked to the service rendered by the deceased husband,
which forms part of the terminal benefits from his employer.
Thus, denying the DA on family pension does not prevent
double benefits; instead, it merely penalises the family of
the deceased because the writ petitioner was gainfully
employed on her own merits.
14.It is to be noted that the Dearness Allowance on
family pension was suspended by the Government of Tamil
Nadu vide G.O.Ms.No.191, Finance (Pension) Department,
dated 16.03.1996. Thereafter, as per the memorandum
issued by the Government of India dated 02.07.1999 has
issued orders allowing Dearness Allowance on family
pension to the employed family pensioners at the rates
applicable from time to time. In pursuance to the above
said memorandum dated 02.07.1999, the Government of
Tamil Nadu, vide G.O.Ms.No.112 dated 24.03.2008
allowed Dearness Allowance on family pension in the case
of employed family pensioners and the same has been
__________
Page  3  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
clearly mentioned in paragraph No.3 of the said G.O., cited
supra. Therefore, we are of the view that rejecting the writ
petitioner's request on the ground that since she is working
as Deputy Director/P.A. (Agri) to the District Collector,
Theni, she is not entitled for Dearness Allowance on family
pension, is contrary to the above mentioned
G.O.Ms.No.112 dated 24.03.2008. There is no merits in the
writ appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed.”
3.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent
corporation by referring to an interim order passed by a Division Bench
of Principal Seat in C.M.P.Nos.17855 and 17857 of 2026 in
Rev.Apl.SR.Nos.76271 and 70266 of 2026, submits that in similar issues,
review applications have been entertained and interim order has also been
passed by the Division Bench of Principal Seat.
4. A perusal of the interim order passed in C.M.P.Nos.17855 and
17857 of 2026 in Rev.Apl.SR.Nos.76271 and 70266 of 2026 reveals that
an order has been passed in W.A.Nos.2422 and 2424 of 2022 by a
Division Bench of the Principal Seat and the same has been stayed by a
Division Bench of the Principal Seat while entertaining the review
applications and the review applications are yet to be decided.
__________
Page  4  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
5.However, the fact remains that a Division Bench of this Court has
taken a similar decision based on the decision taken by a Division Bench
of the Principal Seat in W.A.Nos.2422 and 2424 of 222 dated 23.09.2025
and also the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttar
Pradesh and others vs. Ajay Kumar Sharma, reported in ( 2016) 15 SCC
289 .
6.Since the issue has already been decided by this Court in W.P.
(MD)No.35410 of 2025, on 10.12.2025, which has also been confirmed
by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.556 of 2026, by
Judgment dated 30.04.2026 and this court has also already decided the
issue in WP(MD)No.28224 of 2026 vide order dated 30.09.2026, this
writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the eligible
Dearness Allowance on the family pension of the petitioner's husband to
the petitioner forthwith. The respondents are at liberty to work out their
remedy in the review application pending before the Division Bench. No
costs.
04-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
DSK
__________
Page  5  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary,
Transport Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai 9.
2. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd,
Rep by its Managing Director,
Bye Pass Road,
Madurai 625 016.
3. The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd,
Madurai Region,
Madurai.
4. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporations
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Rep by its Administrator,
Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai- 2.
__________
Page  6  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )

WP(MD) No. 31469 of 2026
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
DSK
WP(MD)No.31469 of 2026
04-11-2026
__________
Page  7  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 05:05:44 pm )