IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8545 of 2003 MOSTT.LAKSHMI DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Singh, For the State : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, G. A. 10 For the respondent no. 8 : Md. Walior Rahmon, Adv. 7. 11.09.2008 Heard. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner claiming herself to be the first wife of one Praduman Mehta who retired from service as an Assistant Teacher w.e.f. 31th of January, 1999 from Gandhi Middle School, Pama, Saur Bazar, Saharsa. Subsequently, he died on 9th November, 2001. The petitioner claiming to be the first wife, has filed this application for payment of post retiral dues in respect of her deceased husband. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent authorities wherein they have stated that before his death the said Government Servant had filed his pension paper with joint photograph of one Sarojani Devi as his wife and along with a certificate from Anchal Adhikari declaring the said Sarojani Devi as successor of the deceased government servant. In view of the said declaration, the pension claims in respect of the deceased government employee was sanctioned in favour of the Sarojani Devi. However, later on, after some enquiry, it was found that the deceased government servant had one more wife, namely, Lakhi Devi and Sarojani Devi was, in fact, the second wife. The said first wife, namely, the present petitioner also filed an objection petition, before the authorities claiming herself to be - 2 - the first wife and therefore entitled for payment of all pensionary benefits to her. Since the authorities did not act upon it, this writ application was filed. In view of the controversy with regard to the succession and the disputed claim between the two ladies, said Sarojani Devi was made party respondent in the case and notice was issued to her. She has appeared through her learned counsel. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 8 Sarojani Devi has appeared and he has produced a stamped copy of the plaint of a suit and submits that the said Sarojani Devi has now filed a proper Succession Case No. 14 of 2003, in the Court of District Judge, Madhepura in which the present petitioner has also been made defendant. He also submits that Sarojani Devi has filed objections before the authorities that the present petitioner Lakshmi Devi is not a married wife of the deceased government servant whereas one Lakhi Devi, an another lady, was his wife. Apparently there is disputed question of fact in the case as to who, out of the two ladies, is the legally married wife of the deceased and therefore is legally entitled for pensionary benefits. Hence this matter cannot be decided in a proceeding under Article 226. Now a properly constituted succession case has been filed by Sarojani Devi in a competent Court of law. In the circumstances, the matter with regard to payment of pensionary benefits in respect of deceased government employee has to wait till the final declaration in the said succession case. It goes without saying that whoever gets a - 3 - succession certificate from the competent court of law, shall be entitled in respect of the payments towards retiral dues of the deceased. Petition is disposed of. Let the plaint of the suit produced by learned counsel for respondent no. 8 be kept on record. Kundan (Jaynandan Singh, J.)