IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.8733 of 2008 SMT. SHEELA DEVI @ GANGIA DEVI, W/O LATE MANIK RAI, R/O VILLAGE MOHANPUR, POLICE STATION SAMASTIPUR, DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR. ............PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN. 2.THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3.THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 4.THE GENERAL MANAGER CUM CHIEF ENGINEER, MITHILA ELECTRIC DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 5.THE ELECTRIC SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, SAMASTIPUR. 6.THE ASSISTANT ELECTRIC ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY SUB DIVISION, SAMASTIPUR (URBAN). 7.PAWITRI DEVI @ PABITRI DEVI, W/O LATE MANIK RAI, R/O VILLAGE MOHANPUR, POLICE STATION SAMASTIPUR, DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR. ............RESPONDENTS. Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Chandra Bose. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh Mrs. Nivedita Nirwikar 02 26-04-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, hereinafter referred to as the 'Board'. This Court in the facts and circumstances of this case is of the considered opinion that the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has to be rejected only on the ground that she does not fall within the category of the dependent defined in the policy of compassionate appointment. The Government policy as also that of the Board for appointment on compassionate ground recognizes only a wife, a son, unmarried daughter or a widow of the predeceased son to be eligible for appointment on compassionate ground. Here in this case, though the petitioner claims to be the wife of the deceased employee but Mr. Prashant Ved Sen would frankly admit that such marriage of the petitioner was performed in the lifetime of the first wife of the deceased employee. He of course has tried to explain that the second marriage of the petitioner with the deceased employee, Late Manik Rai was with the consent of the first wife and in that context, he would rely on the consent order passed in succession cases, but then at the end of the day he will have no answer to the settled position under the Hindu Marriage Act, that any marriage performed by a hindu in the lifetime of his or her spouse is void and that such void marriage would not bestow any right to the petitioner for claiming benefit of being a legally wedded wife of the deceased employee for being considered for appointment on compassionate ground. That being so, this application alleging inaction of the authorities concerned is the matter of appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha ,J)