IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1773 of 2008 SUSHILA DEVI WIFE OF LATE JAGDISH PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PUPAULIA KHURD, P.O. & P.S.- PACHPAKRI, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUGLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING CIRCLE, MOTIHARI, AT & P.O.- MOTIHARI 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUGLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DIVISION DHAKA, AT & P.O.- DHAKA, DISTRICT- MOTIHARI ----------- 2 06.05.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and the Accountant General. The grievances of the petitioner is that upon the death of her husband in harness on 01.05.2007 while working on the post of Assistant Tube-well Mechanic under the respondent no.3, no death-cum-retiral dues have been settled and paid to the petitioner allegedly on the ground that one another lady namely, Dukhani Devi is also staking her claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on perusal of the nomination paper with respect to payment of group saving scheme amount bearing the signature of the deceased employee as also other documents as contained in Annexure-C series with respect to payment of retiral dues by way of family pension etc. bearing the signature of the deceased employee, the petitioner has been shown as the wife of the deceased employee. It is further submitted that the department is obliged to consider for sanction of the - 2 - payment of death-cum-retiral dues including the family pension to the petitioner in the light of the documents available with the department submitted by the deceased employee during his life time. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in view of the objection raised by one Dukhani Devi, who also claims herself to be the wife of the deceased employee, the payment of pensionary benefits could not be settled as yet. Learned counsel, however, submits that the papers submitted by the said Dukhani Devi did not mention the date of her marriage with the deceased employee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the fact that the department ought to have considered the claim of the petitioner on basis of the documents already available with the department submitted by the deceased employee during his life time whereby the petitioner has been shown to be his legally wedded wife entitling the petitioner to the family pension and other retiral dues, however, for expeditious disposal of the pending claims, the petitioner proposes to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.2 within a copy to the respondent no.3 for settling the claim within regard to death-cum-retiral dues for which the requisite papers were submitted with the department long ago. - 3 - In such view of the matter, in case such representation stating details of unpaid claims is filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today along with the certified copy of the present order as also the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of the claim, the grievances of the petitioner raised in the representation shall be considered in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation considering the documents produced by the petitioner after giving information/notice to the other lady namely, Dukhani Devi, who also claims herself to be the wife of the deceased employee so that the grievances of the petitioner could be settled without delay and upon consideration the admitted dues found payable could also be paid along with interest permissible under the rules. However, upon consideration if any of the claim or part of the claims are found not admissible the same shall be informed to the petitioner with reasons thereof by post under registered cover. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)