Patna High CourtL.P.A/1811/2015dismissed

Punam Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-09-01Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1811 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16146 of 2008 =========================================================== Punam Singh, wife of Late Janardan Singh, resident of Village & P.O. Karanauti, P.S. Bakhtiyarpur, District - Patna.

.... .... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The D.G.-cum-I.G. of Police, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Additional D.I.G. of Police, C.I.D., Bihar, Patna.

4. The D.I.G. of Police, C.I.D., Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance:

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Raisul Haque, SC 10 and Mr. Binay Kumar, AC to SC 10.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 01-09-2017 There are two things which are evident from perusal of order dated 28.07.2015, which has been appealed against; firstly that the appellant is the second wife of late Janardan Singh, who was a Sub Inspector of Police who died in harness on 20.01.2002, since the death happened in the year 2002, the object of providing compassionate appointment has been lost in the last 15 years; and secondly, that admittedly since the appellant was the second wife and the second marriage was held during the life time of the first wife, the law does not give any status or recognition to the said marriage.

Patna High Court LPA No.1811 of 2015 dt.01-09-2017 2/2

2. Learned counsel for the appellant tried to persuade the Court that the second wife was the sister of the first wife and, therefore, Rule 2(3) of the Bihar Government Servants Conduct Rules brings her within the ambit of consideration by virtue of being a dependant.

3. Rule 2(3) of the aforesaid Rules has no applicability for the two stumbling blocks - firstly, that that the death happened in the year 2002 and, secondly, that the appellant has no legal status as a wife under the law, therefore, the Court will not interfere whatever be the reasons provided by the learned Single Judge.

4. Appeal is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Dilip, AR AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 06.09.2017 Transmission Date N/A