![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Wednesday, Sep 27, 2006 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Front Page |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Front Page
Staff Reporter
MADURAI: K. Rethinathammal, a nonagenarian of Pudukottai, might not have even imagined that her marriage with a village headman (`Thalaiyari') way back in 1922 would be in question now for disbursing family pension due to her. Her husband, S. Kalimuthu Thevar, had served as a headman until the post was abolished in 1980. Even as the authorities were processing his application for grant of pension, he took his last breath in 1998. Thereafter, the petitioner claimed family pension. But the authorities did not accede to her request on the ground that the petitioner was the second wife of the headman. She was asked to prove the legality of her claim. Accordingly, the petitioner produced a marriage certificate issued by the Tahsildar concerned who confirmed that she married the headman only after the demise of his first wife in 1920. A legal heir certificate in support of the petitioner and her daughter was also obtained. Her efforts to convince the authorities went in vain for the past eight years and, as a last resort, she approached the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. Passing orders on her writ petition, Justice N. Paul Vasanthakumar directed the officials to sanction all retirement benefits including pension arrears due to the petitioner since 1998. The Judge said that the officials were not justified in refusing the family pension especially when no one else had claimed it. He also pointed out that the petitioner's marriage was solemnised nearly 33 years before the enactment of the Hindu Marriages Act. Earlier during arguments, the petitioner's counsel said even assuming that the Act would apply to the petitioner, it would still be valid in the eyes of law because the petitioner had married the headman after the demise of the first wife and not when the latter was alive.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2006, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|