ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 01-07-2024 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Kunal Tiwary, learned advocate representing the South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Patna.

2. The petitioner admittedly is the second wife of the erstwhile employee seeking quashing of the letter no. 962 dated 09.05.2022 issued under the signature of respondent No. 1 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for distribution of the pension of her husband. Learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the permission of the first wife of the petitioner’s husband because despite passage of time the first wife could not be blessed with any issue. A marriage certificate dully solemnized in a temple has also been brought on record vide Annexure 2. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, the petitioner had submitted a representation before the concerned respondent authorities which finally came to be rejected by the General Manager-cum- Chief Engineer, PESU Region, Patna. All the children are major.

3. Learned advocate for the respondent Power Distribution Company Limited straightway drew the attention of this Court to a decision