IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12343 of 2011 Sushma Sharma wife of Late Devendra Kumar resident of village/Mohalla Amba Nagar, New Harni Chak P.S.Phulwarisharif District Patna. ……………….Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Bihar. 2.The Secretary, Excise Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.The District Magistrate, Biharsharif, Nalanda. 4. The Chairman, District Compassionate Committee, Nalanada at Biharsharif. 5. The Superintendent of Excise Police, Excise Department, Biharsharif P.S. Biharsharif District Nalanda. ……………………Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner files a supplementary affidavit enclosing the certificate issued by the Circle Officer, Phulwarisharif with regard to family members of the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Excise Department, Nalanda Biharsharif by which she has been asked to produce a Succession certificate for appointment on compassionate ground being the widow of the deceased Devendra Kumar, who died in harness, while working on the post of Constable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already produced a certificate issued by the Circle Officer, Phulwarisharif, which clearly mentioned that the petitioner is the widow of the said deceased. However, a controversy is being raised in view of another certificate submitted with regard to the number of family members of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she is the widow of the deceased, who married after the death of his Ist wife and in the list 2 of seven, she along with her son and two daughters as well as step daughter, step widow daughter- in -law and grand son are included whereas in the list provided by the step daughter-in-law, only three persons are mentioned and the present petitioner has been shown as second wife. After hearing the counsel for the parties, this Court feel that at least it is not in dispute that the petitioner is the wife of the deceased. The only thing left for determination is whether the marriage took place during the life time of the Ist wife or it was subsequent to her death. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the marriage was after the death of the first wife and in this view of the matter, the petitioner cannot be termed to be the second wife for the purposes of treating her in the category of persons who are eligible for compassionate appointment. It is very clear that when the spouse is surviving and is desirous of compassionate appointment, he or she has got the first right to the same. Only in her or his absence and upon their refusal then only the right of the other members of the family accrue. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the requirement of producing the succession certificate, which is a lengthy process, cannot be justified. Accordingly, this Court directs that the Superintendent of Excise, Nalanda shall look into the matter and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, decide as to whether the petitioner married the deceased during the life time of the 3 first wife or subsequent to it. Consequent upon such finding the concerned respondent shall proceed to make such appointment expeditiously and latest within a period of three months thereafter, in accordance with the rules. The petitioner shall be entitled to produce and refer to all relevant documents and entries in her favour including those relating to Provident Fund etc. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed off. sudha ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)