Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

LAKSHMI DEVI Vs The Union of India

Lakshmi Devi vs The Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 07, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1501000

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/50589/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Lakshmi Devi

Respondent

The Union of India

Excerpt

.....was dismissed on 12.01.2005, thereby affirming the legal status of the 1 st petitioner. subsequent appeals in a.s no.44 of 2005 & s.a no.361 of 2008 were also dismissed, holding that the petitioners are the only legal heirs of m.e.chandrasekar and they are entitled to all his service benefits. in this regard, the petitioners sent representation dated 13.05.2025 to the respondents requesting disbursement of the service benefits in their favour and also seeking compassionate appointment for the 2 nd petitioner. the inaction of the respondent is arbitrary in nature. hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners’ representation within a reasonable time. 4.the learned senior panel counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that they will consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time to be fixed by this court. 5.considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners’ representation dated 13.05.2025 on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, 6.with the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. no costs. 07-01-2026 index: yes/no (2/2)speaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no uma to1. the ministry of law and justice, shastri bhawan, new delhi-110 001.2. the chief administrative officer department of atomic energy, general services organization, kalpakkam-603 102.m.dhandapani, j.uma (2/2) 07-01-2026

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

1. Lakshmi Devi W/o.M.E.Chandrasekar, Sivarampalli Village and Post, Tadimarri Mandal, Ananthapur District, Now Satyasai District, Andhra Pradesh-515 631

2. M.E.Teja S/o.M.E.Chandrasekar, Sivarampalli Village and Post, Tadimarri Mandal, Ananthapur District, Now Satyasai District, Andhra Pradesh-515 631 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Union of India Rep. by the Ministry of law and Justice, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110 001.

2. The Chief Administrative Officer Department of Atomic Energy, General Services Organization, Kalpakkam-603 102.

3. Lakshmi Narasamma C/o.E.M.Srinivasulu, Taduku Railway Station, SBR Puram, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh-517 571. ..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose the representation dated 13.05.2025 made to the respondent No.2 to provide the service benefits of M.E.Chandrasekar to the petitioners and also to give compassionate appointment to his son M.E. Teja.

For Petitioner(s): M/s.P.Subba Reddy For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Janarthanan for R1 & R2 Senior Panel Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 13.05.2025 made to the 2 nd respondent, requesting disbursement of the service benefits of late M.E.Chandrasekar to the petitioners and also seeking compassionate appointment for his son, M.E. Teja. 2.The case of the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner is the legally wedded wife of one M.E.Chandrasekar and their marriage was solemnized in the year 1990 and they were blessed with a male child, named M.E.Teja, the 2nd petitioner herein. In June 2001, her husband went missing, and his whereabouts have not been known till date. Taking advantage of his disappearance, one Lakshmi Narasamma impersonated herself as the 1 st petitioner and fraudulently obtained Rs.1,60,000/- towards service benefits. The said Lakshmi Narasamma filed a suit in O.S No.34 of 2003 seeking a dedlaration that she was the legally wedded wife of M.E.Chandrasekar, and the same was dismissed on 12.01.2005, thereby affirming the legal status of the 1 st petitioner. Subsequent appeals in A.S No.44 of 2005 & S.A No.361 of 2008 were also dismissed, holding that the petitioners are the only legal heirs of M.E.Chandrasekar and they are entitled to all his service benefits. In this regard, the petitioners sent representation dated 13.05.2025 to the respondents requesting disbursement of the service benefits in their favour and also seeking compassionate appointment for the 2 nd petitioner. The inaction of the respondent is arbitrary in nature. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners’ representation within a reasonable time. 4.The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that they will consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court. 5.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners’ representation dated 13.05.2025 on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, 6.With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 07-01-2026 Index: Yes/No (2/2)

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No uma To

1. The Ministry of law and Justice, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110 001.

2. The Chief Administrative Officer Department of Atomic Energy, General Services Organization, Kalpakkam-603 102.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

uma (2/2) 07-01-2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial