IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2741 of 2005 MANSA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- FOR THE PETITIONER : MR.RAGHWENDRA SHARAN PANDEY,ADVOCATE. FOR THE STATE : MR. SHAILENDRA KUMAR JHA, J.C. TO S.C.9 FOR THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL : MR. MADHURESH PRASAD, 06/ 07.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for payment of family pension, arrears of family pension with effect from July, 1989 to till date with statutory interest and other death-cum-retiral dues i.e. Gratuity, Group Insurance, Provident Fund and unutilized leave salary of her late husband Laxmi Prasad, who died while working as a peon in the Survey Office, Gaya. The claim of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said husband of the petitioner was mentally sick and for which treatment was accorded to him and he was sent by the department for treatment. He further submits that after his treatment when the petitioner filed his joining petition on 23.06.1987 that was not considered by the authorities concerned during his lifetime and only after his death on 27.07.1989 an order dated 20.09.1990 (Annexure-C) was passed rejecting his petition. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner remained absent for nine years without any leave from 1978 and hence, when he filed a petition for joining on 23.06.1987 he was not allowed to join by the authority concerned and he died on 27.07.1989 without raising any objection against non- 2 acceptance of his joining petition. He further submits that finally on 20.09.1990 the authority concerned rejected his petition for joining. Hence, according to him the petitioner is not entitled to any dues as claimed by her. From the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the petitioner is also aggrieved by order dated 20.09.1990 by which the joining petition of her husband was rejected by the authority concerned. In the said circumstances, unless that issue is decided the question of death-cum-retiral dues cannot arise. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said order dated 20.09.1990 before any appropriate forum. It may be noted that this order is being passed without considering the merit of the claim of the parties. harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)