IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5114 of 2006 SMT.KUSUM LATA DEVI, wife of Late Bindeshwari Pd. @ Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu, Ex-Senior Auditor, resident of Mohalla- Gauri Shankar Colony, Gai- Ghat, P. O.- Gulzarbagh, P. S. Alamganj, District – Patna…. Petitioner. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. the Secretary, Finance Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. the Chief Controller of Accounts, Finance (Audit) Department, Bihar, Patna 4. The Controller of Accounts, Finance (Audit) Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Treasury Officer, Patna. 6. The Sub-Treasury Officer, Patna City, Patna. 7. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 8. Smt. Chandra Kanta Devi, second wife of Late Bindeshwari Pd @ Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu, resident of Mohalla- Gauri Shankar Colony, Gai- Ghat, P. O. Gulzarbagh, P. S. Alamganj, District Patna. .. Respondents. ----------- 2 7.05.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the State as also counsel for the Accountant General. In this writ petition now the dispute remains confined with regard to payment of family pension of late Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu, Senior Auditor in the Department of Finance, Bihar Patna. It is said that Late Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu died in harness on 4.8.1981 whereafter, the issue for payment of family pension had cropped up in which Chandrakanta Devi, respondent no. 8 was directed to be paid family pension. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the petitioner who is the first wife and ought to have been 2 given the family pension in place of respondent no. 8. Counsel for the petitioner in this respect relies on a judgment of civil court declaring the petitioner as first wife of late Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu. If the said civil suit has been decreed on contest by respondent no. 8, the same becomes binding on her and therefore the competent authority will have to take a fresh decision but only after hearing the petitioner and Respondent no. 8. However, this court would immediately clarify that if the name of Chandrakanta Devi (Respondent no. 8) stands as a nominee in the forms/papers submitted by Bindeshwari Prasad Sahu in his lifetime during his service period and the State was not a party to the said suit, the same will not be binding on the State so as to become liale for double payment to both the petitioner and Respondent no. 8. All these aspects will therefore have to be gone into by the competent authority for deciding the admissibility of family pension to the petitioner and therefore this Court without expressing any final opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner would simply remit the matter to the Chief Controller of Accounts, Finance (Audit) Department, Bihar, Patna, respondent no. 3 3 who would decide this aspect with regard to admissibility of payment of family pension to the petitioner and/or respondent no.8 after giving an opportunity of hearing to both of them. Such dispute however must be decided by the Respondent no. 3 within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and in the event, the petitioner becomes entitled for certain payment, the same also must be extended to her within next two months. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)