Facts
The petitioner, the wife of late N. Senthilkumar, a Senior Conductor with the first respondent, sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to settle his terminal benefits, including gratuity, provident fund and family pension
Source reference: p.1She had submitted a representation to the second respondent on 30 July 2022 claiming those benefits
Source reference: p.2, paras. 2–3The writ petition, filed in 2022, was taken up when there was no appearance for the petitioner or the first respondent; no counter had been filed.
Source reference: p.2, paras. 1, 4–5The second respondent’s counsel stated that the representation would be considered within a reasonable time
Source reference: p.2, paras. 1, 4–5Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation seeking her husband’s terminal benefits
Source reference: p.1; p.2, paras. 2–42. Whether the representation should be decided within a specified period
Source reference: p.2, paras. 5–6; p.3Law Applied
The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, invoking the High Court’s writ jurisdiction to seek a mandamus
Source reference: p.1The Court directed the respondents to decide the representation on its own merits and in accordance with law; it cited no specific statutory provision or precedent as the basis for that direction
Source reference: p.3Reasoning
The Court noted that the petitioner had made a representation claiming gratuity, provident fund and family pension, and that the second respondent had undertaken to consider it
Source reference: p.2, paras. 2–4Given that the petition had been pending since 2022 and no counter had been filed, the Court considered it appropriate to dispose of the matter rather than adjourn it.
Source reference: p.2, para. 5It therefore required the respondents to determine the representation on its merits and in accordance with law, without itself deciding the petitioner’s entitlement to the claimed benefits
Source reference: p.2, para. 6; p.3Holding
The writ petition was disposed of.
The respondents were directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 30 July 2022, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within eight weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.
Source reference: p.3No costs were awarded
Source reference: p.3Original Court PDF
S.KumarivsThe Managing Director
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
