IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3901 of 2010 MALKINIA DEVI @ MALKIN DEVI WIDOW OF LATE MAHABIR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHALAHI, P.O.- BHALAHA HARPUR, P.S. BATHNAHA, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, SITAMARHI 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SITAMARHI 5. THE TREASURY OFFICER, SITAMARHI ----------- 2 29.09.2010 This application is for modification of the order dated 21.07.2010 passed in CWJC no. 11323 of 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in advertence it was stated in the writ application that the family pension to the tune of Rs. 750/- sanctioned by the Accountant General as per pension intimation memo vide annexure-2 the petitioner is being paid by the concerned treasury officer only fifty per cent as a matter of fact the petitioner is receiving Rs.750/- and not fifty per cent of the said amount. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the above application, in the last line of paragraph 3 of the order dated 21.07.2010 the word “only 50 % of” be deleted. The order is accordingly modified. Learned counsel submits that as a matter of fact the petitioner is the first wife of the - 2 - deceased employee and as such she was paid only fifty per cent of the family pension and rest was kept for payment of family pension to the minor legal heirs of the second wife. It is submitted that there are only two legal heirs of the second wife who are major and as such they are not entitled to family pension. Consequently the petitioner ought to have been sanctioned 100 % of the family pension i.e. Rs. 1500/- per month. Be that as it may, it will be open for the petitioner to place his grievances before the appropriate authority for necessary consideration. The M.J.C. application accordingly stands disposed of. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)