WP/22143/2022 of Meena Vs The Zonal Director on 9 October 2026

ORDER

The present Writ petition has been filed for the issuance of the Writ of

WP No. 22143 of 2022

Mandamus to grant terminal benefits and pension to the petitioner due to demise of the petitioner’s husband Thangamani.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the wife of deceased Thangamani. who joined the services of the second respondent Corporation in the year 1999. Subsequently, he married the petitioner and since then both were living as husband and wife. He further submitted that she is the Class-I legal heir of the deceased, whereas the 3rd respondent who is the nephew (brother's son) of the deceased husband, name has been recorded as the nominee in the service records. On the basis of which the respondents have withheld the settlement of terminal benefits to the petitioner. It is the specific submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that mere nomination does not confer any right to receive the pensionary benefits and that the 3rd respondent has no right since the petitioner, being the Class-I legal heir and alive. Hence prayed to allow the writ petition.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader and the leaned counsel for the 2nd respondent in all fairness submitted that the respondents would comply with the direction of this Court. However Mr.E.Kannadasan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent contend that since there is a nomination in the service records of the petitioner’s husband, the 3rd respondent is the only person entitled to terminal benefits and in this regard he has already

WP No. 22143 of 2022

filed a suit in O.S.No.15 of 2023. Therefore, the petitioner cannot have any remedy, due to the pendency of the civil suit. Hence prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

5. Even according to the 3rd respondent, there is no serious dispute with regard to the marriage contracted between the deceased, Thangamani, and the petitioner, Meena. Admittedly, the petitioner is the Class-I legal heir. The sole objection raised by respondents 1 and 2 is the nomination of the third respondent in the service records. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased joined the respondent Corporation in 1999, at which time he was unmarried, which explains why he had nominated his nephew. Such submission is reasonable one. Furthermore, it is a well- settled principle of law that a mere nomination cannot be construed as a will or a bequest. A nominee is nothing but a trustee, whose duty is to receive the terminal benefits from the statutory authorities and disburse them to the persons legally entitled to the same.

6. In the case at hand, since the petitioner is the Class-I legal heir and has applied to the respondents for the settlement of the terminal benefits, this Court is of the firm view that a mere nomination in favour of the third respondent can

WP No. 22143 of 2022

in no way stand in the way of disbursing the amount to the petitioner. Furthermore, mere pendency of the suit will not hinder the right of the petitioner and it is admitted case that the petitioner is a legally wedded wife of the deceased Thangamani.

7. In such view of the circumstances, this Court could find all justification to issue a Writ of Mandamus to respondents 1 and 2 to settle the terminal benefits and pension to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 09-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SHL To:

1. The Zonal Director Municipal Administration, Vellore

2. The Commissioner Arcot Municipality, Arcot, Ranipet District

WP No. 22143 of 2022

C.KUMARAPPAN J. SHL WP No. 22143 of 2022 09-10-2026