High Court · 2025

SRI JUSTIC wRIT PETITtoN NO: EN AGE SH BHEEMAPAKA 307 890 F2 018 Between: K. Lalitha, D/O. K. Narsiml- Lingamaih or.lrr,'' on"o 40 years occ Hor rr, Medak -so2o32,r",rnnult" "",""r, AND Hold' R/o. 7-95lA, "'PETlrloNER 1 The state of Terangana, Rep. by its principar secr Finance (Pension-l), Hyoeraoao ! The Managing Director, Hyderabad Metropolitan Wi Board (HMwsSB) Khairtabad, Hyderabad. 3. The General Manager retary, Department of ater Supply and Sewerage sewerase ,",,0 rn*lrTJ:,] #iji::. J:,,"J",*" Navodaya corony -Guddimarkapur, Hyd. _28 water suppry and laint - Division No.. ilr, ..,RESPONDENTS petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direct. the nature of writ of Mandamus, d rectins ,n" o".o"ll"Iij;;"#':'J":::J the case of the Petitione r for Avaitir,^ rha ra*;r.. ^^_ pension under the G'o Ms. 315, Dated. 07.10.20.10 against ilJ;:[lnfamirv I I I I I : l l i IANO:1OF 2018 petition under Section j51 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to pass the family pension to the orders directing the Respondents herein ': ':"]"i't" '' Petitioner during the pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI' RAJASHEKAR THALLAPALLY Counsel for the Respondent No'1: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING Gounset ror the Respondent Nos' 2&3: t*' The Court made the following: ORDER 3;X=*ET*=3t5U$Sft ;:aiti&* - HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEBMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.3 0789 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: " to issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ oif l4andamu.s directing the re.rpondents herein to consider the case of the petitioner for availing the family pension under the G.O.Ms.No.3l5 Dateel 07.10.2010 against the Ccttegory No.II and pass appropriate order forthwith. "

2. The petitioner is the youngest daughter of late Sri. K. Narsimha, who was Tech. Gr. I (TB) in the respondent_ Department, and retired on 30.04.2005 and passed away on 31.01 .2010. The petitioner's morher, Smt. K. yellamma, predeceased him on 23.06.2007. -l-he petitioner was married in 1996 b]ut faced marital disputes and lived separately from her husband during her father's lifetime. Following her father,s demise,, the petitioner obtained a divorce decree in O.p. No. 32 of 20ll . Petitioner contends her financial dependence on her father during his lifetime and her inability to sustain herself post his demise due to lack ol employment or income. Her siblings, comprising three brothers who are agricultural laborers and a married sister, have provided a notarized, 2 affidavit of no-objection dated 15'05'2017' consenting to her receiving their father's family pension' Petitioner has submitted all requisite documents' including the family member cerlificate dated 17'08'2015' hnancial status ceftificate dated 05.08.20 15, and multiple representations' the latest being on 20.12.2016. Despite complying with all procedural requirements and being eligible under Category-tI of G.o.Ms.No.315,Finance(Pension-I)Depaftment'dated 0T.l0.20l0,thepetitionerhasnotbeengrantedthetamily pension by the respondents; hence' the present writ petltlon' 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions on the lines of writ afhdavit' 4. Sri A. Veeresh Kumar' learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No' 2, submits that Late K' Narsimha passed away on 31.0 1.2010' As on the date of the pensioner's death' no one in the family was eligible for the sanction of a lhmily pension' as the pensioner's wit-e had predeceased him' and the petitioner' now claiming the tamily pension' was also not etigible' He contends that the petitioner's marriage had not been annulled as on the date of her f-ather's death' According to the Telangana RevisedPensionRules,lg80,onlyawidowordivorced daughter is eligible for a family pension if she became a widow or divorced as on the date of the pensioner's death and was 3 wholly dependent on the pensioner during his rifetime. In this case, the petitioner's father passed away on 3l.Ol.2Ol0, while the petitioner obtained a divorce on22.I2.2Oll,i.e., nearly two years after her father,s death. As such, no one was eligible for the sanction of a famiry pension on the date of the pensioner,s death. He further submits that since the petitioner obtained a divorce after a gap of two years from the date of her father,s death, she cannot claim a pension under Category_Il of G.O.Ms.No.3l5, Finance . (pension_I) Department, dated

07.10.2010.

5. Leamed counsel, in reply, submits that the petitioner has been living apart from her husband since 2005, as detaired in the divorce decree in O.p. No. 32 of 20ll passed by the Senior Civil Judge at Sangareddy (Family Court). The petitioner has bcen financially dependent on her father, the late K. Narsimha, untir his demise on 31.01.2010. Leamed counsel further submits that the assertion by Respondent Nos. I to 3 regarding a two_year gap following the death of the petitioner's father is factua,y incorrect. During the rifetime of her father, the petitioner, along with her children, had been residing at her parental home since 2005. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a divorce petition, which culminated in the decree being granted in 2011. Therefore, the petitioner qualifies for the family pension in accordance with the Telangana Revised pension Rules, 19g0, under \\ J I 4 Category-ll, as stipulated in G'O'Ms'No'3 15' dated 07'10'2010' 6. Upon careful consideration of the submissions made by both parties and the material placed on record' it may be noted that the petitioner had filed O'P'No'32 of 2011 stating that her marriage was performed in the year 1996 and'due to marital discord' she had been residing with her father since 2005 and was financially dependent on him until her father's demise on 31'01'2010' While a decree of divorce was obtained in 201 1' the petitioner's separation from her husband in 2005 and dependency on her father during his lifetime and obtaining divorce are a matter of record before the trial Court' Furthermore, Category-Il under GOMs'No'3 15' (Pension-ll) DePartment' dated O7 .10.2010 stipulates as follows: Finance '7 iemarriage whichever is earlier' Category-l: ,it Widow or widower, uPto the date of death or \'' ( i i ) 1,1,:',1'j il?It;; Ii$#l'l?'H""J':* :"'#J:Y) Iii'it "'i"* "i z? V**, whichever is the earliest' (b) sons/daughters who are physically/T9tqlly [lruf.O throughout their life subiect to the conditions sPecifi ed therein tt"ishe starts earning or till the age CategoryJl: (i) Unmarried/widowed/divorced daughter, not covered by Category-l above, upto the date of marriage/remarriage or till the date she starts earning or upto the date of death whichever is the earliest." 5

8. In the instant case, the petitioner was residing with her father, thereby living separately from her husband due to marital disputes. She obtained a formal decree of divorce after the demise of her father, and therefore she is covered under Category_ll of the G.O.Ms.No.3 15. In that view of the matter, the writ petition deserues to be allowed.

9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, and the respondent_ authorities are directed to process and sanction the family pension to the petitioner within eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending ifany, shall stand closed. SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, seckorrrcen 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance (pension-l), T.S.,Hyderabad. 2. The I\/anagr.rlg^Dlte.qlor, Hyde.rqQa! I\rletropolitan Water Su[pty and-Sewerage Board (HMWSSB) Khairtabad, Hyderabad. 3. The General lvlanager (EnSS ), Hyderabad [Vletropolitan Water Suoolv and 9ewerage Board (HMWSSB), Operation and Maint - Division Nd.. lll, Navodaya Colony -Guddimalkapur, Hyd. -28

4. One CC to SRl. RAJASHEKAR THALLAPALLY, Advocate tOpUCl 5. One CC to SRI. A. VEERESH KUIMAR, STANDTNG COUNSEL IOPUCI 6. Two CCs to GP FOR FTNANCE pLANNtNc ,High Court foi the State of 7. Two CD Copies c Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] BI/ GJP HIGH COURT DATED :1 7 10312025 I I /:,'; 1) J ,+ -iE S 4 7 .' ( $2 sEF 2$6 oA.SPAT :_t1LO * ORDER WP.No.30789 of 2018 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS