Smt. Madhuri Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4697 of 2015 ====================================================== Smt. Madhuri Devi, wife of Shashi Bhushan Prasad, resident of village Ekauna, Police Station Simri, District Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Secretary, Labour Employment Department, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Directorate of Employment and Training, Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

4.

The Additional Director, Employment Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Patna.

5.

The Public Information Officer, Directorate of Employment, New Secretariat, Patna.

6.

The Accountant General, Bihar Patna.

7.

Shashi Bhushan Prasad, son of Late Ram Rahasya Prasad, resident of Saubhagya Sharma Path, North Rupaspur, P.S. Rupaspur, Bailey Road, District Patna.

8.

Lalita Devi, residing at Saubhagya Sharma Path, North Rupaspur, Post Sahay Nagar, Bailey Road, District Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhat Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Rajiv Roy, GP-5 Mr. Suresh Kumar, AC to GP-5 For the AG : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No. 8 : Mr. Baxi S.R.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 06-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna, learned counsel for private Respondent No. 7 and learned counsel appearing for Private Respondent No. 8.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4697 of 2015(8) dt.06-05-2019 2/2

2. Petitioner, who claims to be the legally wedded wife of Respondent No. 7 Shashi Bhushan Prasad, who retired in the year 2014, claims that Respondent No. 8 is an imposter and in Matrimonial Suit No. 42 of 2002, which is Annexure-9 an order has been passed in her favour in the compromise filed before the learned court below by both the petitioner and Respondent No. 7 that they are legally wedded wife and husband and are staying together.

3. Petitioner in the present writ application seeks deletion of the name of Respondent No. 8, who has also claimed to be the legally wedded wife of Respondent No. 7.

4. Considering the disputed question of fact, the petitioner is directed to obtain a succession certificate regarding her claim from the court of competent jurisdiction.

5. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U