Madras High Court
WP(MD)/28411/2026 of Meena Vs The Chief Engineer on 1 October 2026
W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 01.10.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD) NO. 28411 of
{CNR:
HCMD011408252026}
Case
QR
1. Meena
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Chief Engineer
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)
No.8, Anna Salai
Chennai - 600 002.
2. The Superintending Engineer
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)
Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle Tirunelveli.
3. The Chief Internal Audit Officer
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)
Anna Salai
Chennai - 600 002.
Respondent(s)
( Uploaded on: 06/10/2026 05:22:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026
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 disburse the family pension payable to the petitioner on account of the demise of the petitioner's husband, Late Kuttalam, together with arrears and all other consequential benefits in pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2019 passed in S.O.P. No.221 of 2014 on the file of Sub Court, Tenkasi by considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 02.07.2026 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner
: Mr.K.Jeyamohan
For Respondents
: Mr.B.Ramanathan
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The petitioner, who is the second wife of a deceased employee of the respondent Corporation, claims family pension in the strength of a decree granted by the Subordinate Court, Tenkasi in SOP.No.221 of 2014 dated 13.12.2019. Though the decree was granted and the same has been furnished to the respondent Corporation, the respondents have not considered the same and, therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.
( Uploaded on: 06/10/2026 05:22:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026
3. Mr.B.Ramanathan, learned counsel takes notice for the respondents and submits that this petitioner is the second wife of the deceased employee of the respondent Corporation and that she is claiming family pension in the strength of an ex-parte decree granted in her favour. According to the learned Standing Counsel, he has been instructed that the respondents are likely to file a petition to set aside the ex-parte decree.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the first wife had deserted the deceased employee and died on 15.03.2012 without any issues. Thereafter, the marriage of this petitioner with the deceased employee was solemnized. Hence, according to the learned counsel, this petitioner is entitled to family pension and the same has also been confirmed by the Subordinate Court, Tenkasi in SOP.No.221 of 2014 dated 13.12.2019.
5. Considering the rival submissions made, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a call on the
( Uploaded on: 06/10/2026 05:22:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026 petitioner's representation dated 02.07.2026 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
01.10.2026 mbi Speaking / Non-Speaking order Index: Yes/No NCC: Yes/No Internet: Yes
( Uploaded on: 06/10/2026 05:22:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026 B.PUGALENDHI, J. mbi W.P.(MD)No.28411 of 2026 01.10.2026
( Uploaded on: 06/10/2026 05:22:22 pm )