Smt. Laxmi Saha v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1208 of 2021 Smt. Laxmi Saha W/o Shri Tapan Kumar Saha Aged About 51 Years Resident Of Village Gudiyari, Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Electricity Board Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya , Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.

Executive Engineer Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (DC Office) Budhwari Bazarpara Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh. 3.

Tapan Kumar Saha S/o Shri Upendra Kumar Saha Aged About 62 Years Retired Operator Grade 01, Resident Of Budhwari Bazarpara Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh.

4.

Accountant General Of Chhattisgarh. Zero Point Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---Non-Applicants For Petitioner :

Mr. B.L. Sahu, Advocate For State :

Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Dy. A.G.

For Respondent No.4 :

Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/03/2021 1.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the action on the part of the respondent No.3 who has got the name of the petitioner deleted from the service record as nominee and has entered the name of another lady as his wife to be the nominee.

2.

Perusal of the record would show that the husband of the petitioner has already retired from employment and that from the available pleadings it appears that the relationship of the husband with the petitioner was strained and under the customary law the husband of

-2the petitioner seems to have entered into another marriage and name of the second wife has already got entered at his request. 3.

Given the nature of dispute that the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition this Court is of the firm view that the such dispute could not be entertainable under the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition therefore stands rejected reserving the right of the petitioner to avail other appropriate remedies available under the other provisions of law governing the field.

4.

With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved