IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18156 of 2009 MOST. JOGMAYA DEVI, W/O LATE SANT LAL SINGH, R/O VILL. AND P.O. BHARAT KHAND, P.S. PARBATTA, DISTT.- KHAGARIA ---Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. DIRECTOR EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, KHAGARIA. 5. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. BARUN KUMAR S/O LATE SANT LAL SINGH,R/O VILL. AND P.O. BHARAT KHAND, P.S.- PARBATTA, DISTT.- KHAGARIA. ---Respondents ------- 6. 2.7.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State as well as the Accountant General. This writ application has been filed for direction to the authorities concerned to sanction family pension in favour of the petitioner, who claims herself to be the widow of the deceased employee. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State wherein in paragraph 12 it has been stated that the petitioner has not submitted any paper in support of her claim that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee Sant Lal Singh, who died on 19th of August, 1988. Besides the above, it is submitted that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court claiming family pension, vide C.W.J.C. No.11203 of 1998, which was disposed of vide order dated 2.7.1999, as contained in Annexure 4. This Court, after taking note of the statements made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General in the said case that the family pension has been authorized in favour of the son of the deceased employee, who 2 has been nominated by the deceased employee, disposed of the said writ application accordingly. Thereafter the petitioner filed a review application, vide Civil Review No.302 of 1999, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 12th of February, 2001, as contained in Annexure 5, after taking note of the fact that the deceased employee had made a nomination for receiving the family pension and in case the sanction order is not issued, the matter may be settled in a contempt proceeding. The son of the petitioner thereafter filed an application for initiating contempt proceeding vide M.J.C. No.908 of 2001, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.2.2004, as contained in Annexure 6. This Court, after taking note of the statements made in the show cause that the Family Pension Payment Order has been issued in favour of the son of the deceased employee, who was his nominee, did not find any occasion to initiate any proceeding for contempt. As such, the said M.J.C application was dismissed. It was, however, observed that in case the petitioner or the wife of the deceased employee is left with any grievance, it will be open to them to seek their remedy in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the State submits that this writ petition is not maintainable as the matter in issue has already been agitated by the petitioner in this Court and considered on merits vide order as contained in Annexure 4. From the averments made in the writ application, it appears that the prayer is only for payment of family pension and there is no other grievance and the matter with regard to the payment of family pension has been considered and disposed of by this Court 3 by the aforesaid order dated 2.7.1999 passed in C.W.J.C. No.11203 of 1998, as contained in Annexure 4. Considering the submissions of the parties and their respective pleadings, I do not find any merit in this writ application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)