Persons Being Taken Care Of By Relatives Also Entitled To Claim Old Age Pension: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently observed that the Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme did not contain any specific provision that excluded persons who were being taken care of by their relatives. Thus, Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan ordered benefits to be given to an octogenarian whose application for old age pension was rejected due to the fact that he was being taken care of by his grandchildren. The court ruled that even though the petitioner was being taken care of by his grand children, he might still require financial help for other things including medical and incidental expenses. Thus, the court set aside the order of the Tahsildar and directed him to give benefits. “Therefore when there is no specific condition in the said scheme that the scheme cannot be extended to persons who is taken care of by the relatives, the respondents ought not to have stated reasons referring to the Petitioner's relatives are taking care of him. Even though the Petitioner may be taken care of by his grand children, he requires further financial help or other reasons including medical and incidental expenses. Therefore the application of the Petitioner ought not to have been rejected by the first respondent [Tahsildar],” the court said. The court was hearing a petition filed by an octogenarian, Chinnakalai. Chinnakalai was below the poverty line and applied for the old age pension under the scheme. However, in September 2019 the Tahsildar rejected the application on the basis of the Firka Inspector's report, which said that Chinnakalai's wife was getting the pension and also that Chinnakalai was being looked after by the grandsons. The Government Advocate submitted that to avail the benefit under the scheme, the claimant should be a destitute, must be above 60 years of age and belonging to below poverty line. In the present case, he argued that the petitioner was not a destitute as he was being looked after by his grandsons. The court however noted that though the petitioner was not a destitute, it could not be said that he was maintained by the grandsons. The court noted that Chinnakalai did not have any source of income. The court also noted that the Firka Inspector had failed to conduct a due enquiry and had failed to give an opportunity to Chinnakalai to ascertain whether he was destitute or not. Thus, noting that the order was liable to be quashed, the court allowed the plea and ordered accordingly. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. M. Jerin Mathew Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. M. Senthil Ayyanar Govt Advocate Case Title: Chinnakalai v The Tahsildar (Social Welfare Scheme) and Another Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 14 Case No: W.P(MD)No.28592 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

Persons Being Taken Care Of By Relatives Also Entitled To Claim Old Age Pension: Madras High Court

Upasana Sajeev

Tags