IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.767 of 2009 Masomat Kalyani Devi w/o late Satyadeo Sharma, r/o village – Noawan, P.S. – Asthawan, District Nalanda …Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna 3. The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Director of Primarya Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5. The Regional Dy. Director of Education, Patna Division, Patna 6. The District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, Biharsharif 7. The District Provident Fund Officer, Nalanda 8. The Headmaster -cum- Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Middle School, Badi P.S. Katari Sarai, Nalanda 9. Mosmat. Shanti Devi wife of late Satyadeo Sharma, resident of village – Noawan, P.S. – Asthawan, District – Nalanda ………… Respondents ----------- For the appellant: Mr. Omkar Pd. Dikshit, Advocate For the respondents 1 to 8: Mr. P.K.Shahi, AG 2 2/9/2009 Heard Mr. Omkar Pd. Dikshit, counsel for the appellant and Mr. P.K.Shahi, counsel for the respondents 1 to 8. In view of the order proposes to be passed, it is not necessary to issue notice to present respondent no.9. However, it is made clear that in case respondent no.9 feels aggrieved she can file appropriate application for recalling of the present order. The present respondent no.9 had filed 2 CWJC. No.1989 of 2008, claiming that she should have been given pensionary and retiral benefits on account of death of her husband late Satyeadeo Sharma, who was working under present respondent nos. 1 to 8. Learned single judge has simply disposed of the said writ petition by permitting the writ petition (present respondent no.9) to make a fresh representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, which was directed to be disposed of by a reasoned order in accordance with law. The said order is being challenged by Kalyani Devi claiming to be the first wife of late Satyadeo Sharma. It is apparent from the counter affidavit filed by Kalyani Devi that a suit relating to status of the party is already pending. The order of the learned single judge shows that the matter has not been decided on merits. It has been simply disposed of with liberty to the writ petitioner (present respondent no.9) to make a fresh representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda. Therefore, we do not see that the 3 present appellant is prejudiced by such order. Be that as it may, we dispose of the appeal with observation and direction to the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda to give an opportunity of hearing to the present appellant while considering the representation of Shanti Devi. This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. Neyaz/ (P.K.Misra, CJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.)