1 WP865.11 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION NO. 865 OF 2011 Smt.Laxmi Suresh Raghatwan ... Petitioner v/s Syndicate Bank ... Respondent Mr.Sanjiv Punalekar i/by Jyoti Ghorpade for the petitioner. Mr.Piyush Shah for the respondent. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR & R. Y. GANOO, JJ. DATED: 3RD AUGUST, 2011 P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of both parties. 2. Heard counsel for both parties. 3. The limited relief claimed in this petition is to direct the respondent to furnish full accounts of terminal benefits due and payable to the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased employee Mr.Suresh B. Raghatwan. The counsel 2 WP865.11 for the respondent submits that there is some dispute regarding the entitlement of the petitioner. He submits that representations have been received to the effect that the petitioner was not the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee Suresh B. Raghatwan. On the other hand, the petitioner is relying on the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar of Marriage, Thane, dated 2.11.1996, which clearly indicates that the marriage between the petitioner and deceased employee Suresh B. Raghatwan was solemnized on 19.10.1996. This evidence produced by the petitioner, prima facie, indicates that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee. Merely because some representations have been received by the department, in any case, would not warrant the stand taken by the department that the petitioner is not entitled to even disclosure about the terminal benefits payable on account of death of Suresh B. Raghatwan. The petitioner is not seeking direction against the respondent that the amount so payable to the legal representatives of Suresh B. Raghatwan should be forthwith released and paid to her. It is open to the respondent department to ask the petitioner to seek appropriate declaration and direction from the Court of competent jurisdiction for release of such amount. The information desired by the petitioner from the respondent be furnished to the petitioner on this clear understanding. In 3 WP865.11 our opinion, the respondent cannot sit in judgment over the correctness of the allegations in the representations received by it questioning the relationship of the petitioner with the deceased employee Suresh B. Raghatwan. That is a matter which will have to be adjudicated by the Court of competent jurisdiction. 2. Accordingly, we allow this petition in terms of prayer clause (a) on the above terms. 3. The information shall be furnished to the petitioner within four weeks from the receipt of the order. ( R. Y. GANOO, J. ) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) 4 WP865.11