(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to disburse to the writ petitioner the 50% of the Contributory Pension of the petitioners husband Late. M.Rajasekaran (AR Emp No.2661)(Emp No.7216795).)

1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents herein to disburse to the writ petitioner 50% of the Contributory Pension of the petitioners husband, Late Mr.M.Rajasekaran.

2. The husband of the petitioner, by name Mr.M.Rajasekaran, while working as a Grade II Police Constable in the Armed Reserve, Ramanathapuram District, met with an accident on 02.12.2022 and died on 22.02.2023 while undergoing medical treatment. Upon the demise of the said Mr.M.Rajasekaran, his wife, who is the petitioner herein, made a claim for payment of terminal benefits and she was paid an amount of Rs.8,46,157/- under various heads, namely, Family Security Funds, Terminal Leave Salary, Unearned Leave Salary, Special Provident Fund and Tamil Nadu Police Benevolent Fund. It was thereafter, the proposal for disbursement of the Contributory Pension Scheme amount was forwarded to the Commissioner of Treasury and Accounts Department, Chennai, on 19.05.2023. The Commissioner of Treasury and Accounts Department appears to have required the petitioner to submit a No Objection Certificate from the parents of the said Mr.M.Rajasekaran on the ground that their names were also shown in the legal heir certificate issued by the Tahsildar concerned and issued a letter in NC.1395805/PensionScheme/2023 dated 30.05.2023. It is for want of production of a No Objection Certificate from the parents of the deceased Police Constable, the Contributory Pension Scheme amount lying to the credit of the deceased employee is not being disbursed to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court contending that her in-laws are not cooperating with the petitioner and, on the other hand, they are acting prejudicially to her interest and are not ready and willing to issue the No Objection Certificate even for withdrawing 50% of the Contributory Pension Fund amount, for which the petitioner is otherwise legally entitled.

3. In spite of service of notice on the fifth respondent, who is the father of the deceased Police Constable, has not chosen to enter appearance nor filed any counter affidavit in the writ petition.

4. The fourth respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit stating the facts of the case and also stating that it is only for want of a No Objection Certificate that the Contributory Pension Fund could not be disbursed to the petitioner.

5. Heard Mr.K.R.Laxman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Jeganathan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4.

6. Despite service of notice, the fifth respondent has not chosen to enter appearance for the reasons best known to him.

7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the fifth respondent is well-off and is not dependent on the Contributory Pension Fund amount of his deceased son, but it is only with a view to harass the petitioner herein and to deprive her of receiving the amounts due to her under the Contributory Pension Scheme that the fifth respondent is withholding himself from appearing before this Court.

8. The counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent speaks about the facts of the case. There is no dispute about the status of the petitioner being the wife of the deceased Police Constable. It is also not in dispute that already an amount of Rs.8,46,157/- has been disbursed to the petitioner, as noted hereinabove, in the capacity of the wife of the deceased Police Constable.

9. Admittedly, the petitioner and the fifth respondent are Hindus. Even if the Contributory Pension Scheme amount available to the credit of the deceased Police Constable is treated as his estate, the Class I heirs in terms of the provisions contained in the Hindu Succession Act are the wife and the mother of the deceased Police Constable. It is also not in dispute that the husband of the petitioner passed away within three months of her marriage and there were no children born out of the marriage. Therefore, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner herein and the mother of the Police Constable are the only Class I heirs who are entitled to succeed to the estate of the deceased Police Constable. If that be the case, neither the fifth respondent herein nor the mother-in-law of the petitioner herein can have any objection of whatsoever nature to the withdrawal of 50% of the Contributory Pension Scheme fund available to the credit of the deceased Police Constable. As the petitioner is making a request for release of only 50%, to which she is otherwise entitled under law, this Court does not see any justification either for the Commissioner of Treasury and Accounts Department or for the respondents to insist upon production of a No Objection Certificate from the fifth respondent and his wife. In the light of the above, considering the fact that the fifth respondent herein, in spite of service of notice, has chosen not to appear before this Court, this Court has no other option except to treat that the fifth respondent has no objection to the relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition.

10. In the light of the above, this Court does not see any impediment to grant the relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary steps for disbursement of 50% of the Contributory Pension Scheme amount available to the credit of Late Mr.M.Rajasekaran, together with interest, if any accrued, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.