Heard the parties.

2. The admitted position is that the petitioner is the second wife. The first wife is respondent no.5, who is represented through her counsel.

3. The husband was working as a Mali in Road Construction Division, Patna. He died in harness on 7.12.2008. Obviously he left behind a bundle of disputes, which are being sorted out in the Court including fight for retiral benefits of the dead employee.

4. Petitioner wants a direction upon the respondents to settle all claims in her favour in view of her nomination by ex employee. However that was seriously contested by the first wife on the basis of information obtained under Right to Information Act, which certifies that there was no nomination. In this background respondent-authority asked for the Succession Certificate, which in the opinion of the Court is the right course of action.

5. So far as mandamus in favour of the second wife is concerned, the Court cannot ignore the circular dated 6.9.1996, which has been incorporated in the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 and is re-produced herein below:–

^^fcgkj ljdkj foÙk foHkkx Kki la[;k& ihñ lhñ & 1 fel & 41/92/ 10,059@foñ] fnukad 6.9.1996

fo"k;%& ljdkjh lsodksa dh nwljh iRuh dks ikfjokfjd isa'ku ds vkns;rk ds lacaèk esaA

funs'kkuqlkj mi;qZDr fo"k; ds izlax esa dguk gS fd foÙk foHkkx ds ifji=k la[;k isu&103/64 - 9505@foñ fnukad 3.10.1964 dh dafMdk 7(iii) dh fVIi.kh (i) ds vuqlkj fdlh e`r ljdkjh lsod dh ,d ls vfèkd fo/kok,¡ thfor gks rks Hkkjr ljdkj ds ,rn~ lacaèkh fu;ekuqlkj ikfjokfjd isa'ku muds chp cjkcj&cjkcj ns; gsS rFkk ,d foèkok dh e`R;q ds mijkUr ikfjokfjd isa'ku dk mDr Hkkx mlds ukckfyx larku dks vuqekU; gS A Hkkjr ljdkj ds i=kad& lhñ ,.M ,ñ thñ 211@vkSfMV& 1/13-86 fnukad 4.3.1987 ds }kjk vc fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS fd nwljh iRuh dks ikfjokfjd isa'ku vuqekU; ugha gSA

2- Hkkjr ljdkj ds mi;qZDr fu.kZ; ds vkyksd esa jkT; ljdkj }kjk lE;d fopkjksijkUr foÙk foHkkx ds Kki la[;k&9505@foñ] fnukad 3.10.1964 dh dafMdk 7(iii) dh fVIi.kh (i) dks foyksfir djrs gq, fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gSs fd ,d iRuh ds thoudky esa nwljk fookg djus ij nwljh iRuh dks ikfjokfjd isa'ku ns; ugha gksxk] ijUrq nwljh iRuh ls mRiUu ukckfyx larku ds iwoZ fu;ekuqlkj ikfjokfjd isa'ku dh lqfoèkk ns; gksxhA

3- mi;qZDr la'kksèku vkns'k fuxZe dh frfFk ls izHkkoh gksxk ijUrq ftu ekeyksa esa ikfjokfjd isa'ku dh lqfoèkk igys iznku dh tk pqdh gS] mudh iqu% leh{kk dj Hkqxrku jksdus vFkok iwoZ esa Hkqxrku dh xbZ jkf'k dh olwyh dh dkjZokbZ ugha dh tk;sxh A iwoZ ds vfu.khZr ekeyksa ij bl la'kksèku ds vuqlkj gh fu.kZ; fy;k tk;sxkA**

6. The position indicated in the above circular reflects the correct legal position as it stands at least after the Hindu Marriage Act came into play.

7. In that view of the matter, there will be difficulty for this Court to issue mandamus in favour of the second wife ignoring the right of the claim of private respondent no.5.The Court, therefore, rejects the writ application with liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy of obtaining Succession Certificate from Civil Court of competent court jurisdiction.

8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.