IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11651 of 2010 RENU KUMARI, wife of Vivek Ranjan, resident of village- Pokhar Bhinda, Police Station Sahiyara, District Sitamarhi. … Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Vivek Ranjan, son of Shri Beni Prasad Singh, resident of village- Pokhar Bhinda, Police Station- Sahiyara, District- Sitamarhi. … Opposite parties. ------- 2. 30.4.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for opposite party no. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of the order dated 9.12.2009 passed by the concerned authority of the Indian Army, the petitioner apprehends that the amount of Rs.7000/- per month as directed in the order of this Court dated 14.9.2009 shall not be paid to her after the retirement of opposite party no. 2 and in this context he relies on the following part of the order dated 9.12.2009; “ It is also for your information that the said amount is required to be paid by the indi to his wife from his own resources after his retirement as directed by the Hon’ble Court. As such, there is no provision to pay maintenance out of one’s pension.” The concerned authority of the Indian Army ought to have taken into consideration that there was 2 direction for deduction of amount either from salary or from pension and therefore the amount of Rs.7000/- will always have to be paid to the petitioner irrespective of the status of the opposite party no. 2 where his service or after his retirement. Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 however informs that the petitioner has not complied the terms of compromise recorded in the order dated 14.9.2009. If that be so and the petitioner has not yet filed a joint divorce petition, her payment of maintenance of Rs.7000/- shall remain withheld till she does so. Counsel for the petitioner however says that the petitioner has not paid any amount in pursuance to the order of this court dated 14.9.2009. Such oral submission of learned counsel of the petitioner is not supported by any averment to this effect in this application. Moreover it also becomes clear from perusal of order dated 9.12.2009 that the concerned, Major SRO of the Army Medical Corps Record Office has categorically issued a direction for payment of Rs.7000/- to the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the said authority Major SRO, Army Medical Corps, the author of 3 Annexure-2 is hereby directed to ensure that the order of this Court as with regard to payment of maintenance must be complied by him. Such payment of Rs.7000/- per month to the petitioner as directed above from the month of May 2010 however shall remain withheld till the petitioner would produce a copy of joint compromise petition filed by her before the said authority. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)