IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10611 of 2011 Gita Devi, Wife of Late Nawal Kishore Jha, resident of Vill + P.O. Lakarmara, P.S. Meharma, Dist-Godda, at present residing at C/O Dr. P.K. Jha, Gita Niwas, Manikpur, P.S. Muzahidpur, Dist. Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Industry Dept. Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Director, Handloom and Sericulture, Govt. of Bihar. 4. Assistant Director Sericulture, Bhagalpur, Dist. Bhagalpur. 5. Accountant General, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondents. ----------- 2. 7.7.2011. Heard Shri Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay Kumar, learned Standing Counsel No.12, who appears on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 4/State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.5/Accountant General. The petitioner, whose husband retired with effect from 31.12.2007 from the post of Supervisor Agro-Project Centre Tasar Inaraban, Kotoriaya, Banka and subsequently died on 21.9.2009, has prayed for directing the respondents to revise her family pension in 6th Pay Revision scale. She has further claimed for payment of arrear of salary of her husband for the period between 16.12.2006 to 31.12.2007. 2 Learned counsel for the State has raised an objection that husband of the petitioner, after retirement till his death, had not raised any such claim and accordingly, such claim may not be entertained by this Court. Fact remains that if salary of her husband was due, the petitioner, being wife of deceased employee, was entitled to raise such claim. Moreover, the court is of the opinion that no specific adjudication can be made by this Court on the issue while exercising its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, instead of granting any specific direction, it is desirable to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation in respect of all her claim before respondent no.3/Director, Handloom land Sericulture, Government of Bihar within a period of six weeks from today. If such representation is filed, the respondent no.3 is required to examine the same and pass appropriate order in respect of redressal of the grievances of the petitioner within four months. If 3 respondent no.3 considers the claim of the petitioner as genuine, he is required to pass order for clearance of all the dues within a period of four months from the date of filing of such representation. Even in case of refusal, respondent no.3 is required to pass a speaking order within aforesaid time and communicate the same to the petitioner. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)