IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 15493 of 2008. [OA No.2097 of 2007] Date of Decision: 16th November, 2011. _______________________________________________________ Smt. Nirmala Devi ….Petitioner. Versus State of HP and others. …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For respondents No.1 to 3: Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General and Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General. For respondent No.4: Ms. Anita Dogra, Central Government Counsel. _________________________________________________________ Surinder Singh, J. (Oral). There has been a rival claim of the petitioner and one Devku with respect to the family pension of deceased Khiwan Ram, an employee of the respondent-Department. Earlier the family pension to the extent of 50% was being granted to the petitioner and on the representation made by Devku that she is also a widow, was also granted remaining 50%. Later Devku represented to the respondent-Department that she is the only legally 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - wedded wife of deceased Khiwan Ram, thus the share of petitioner was stopped. 2. Contra, Smt. Nirmala Devi, petitioner also claimed that she is the only legally wedded wife of deceased. In view of this, the respondent- Department stopped the pension being paid to Devku and vide their letter dated 22.6.1993 directed the parties to produce the “succession certificate” from the competent Court of jurisdiction. Now Devku is stated to have died on 1.11.2001. 3. At this stage, Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already applied for the “succession certificate” which may take time, as and when it is issued, it shall be produced before respondent No. 2. She further submitted that the matter can be disposed of with the direction that the petitioner on getting the “succession certificate” shall produce the same to the second respondent. 4. Therefore on the above submissions, the petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner that on getting the “succession certificate”, shall produce it before the second respondent, thereafter the second respondent shall - 3 - send the same within a reasonable time to the fourth respondent to take decision thereon within one month after its receipt. 5. The petition stands accordingly disposed of with the above direction, so also the pending application(s) if any. November 16, 2011. (Surinder Singh), (rc) Judge.