- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner in this review petition, prayed for reviewing the order dated 22.9.2004 passed in W.P.(S) No. 4884 of 2004. Counsel for the petitioner would explain that the order of this court has been passed ex -parte against the petitioner since, despite being the necessary party, he was not impleaded as a party respondent in the writ application.. Explaining further, learned counsel submits that the petitioner is the son of Late Kedar Nath Sharma and therefore, he is the legal heir and successor to the estate of his father and is entitled to the share in the property left behind his father. The writ petitioner Sunita Devi (Respondent No. 2) had claimed herself to be the widow of Late Kedar Nath Sharma and on the basis of the pleadings made by her in the writ application, and without impleading the petitioner and other legal heirs and successors of the deceased, had obtained an order dated 22.09.2004. This, despite the fact that in the previous writ application vide W.P.(C) No. 726 of 2003, filed by the same lady, late Kedar Nath Sharma had appeared before this court and had made a categorical declaration on affidavit that Sunita Devi is not his legally married wife. Rather, his legally married wife is Chandrika Devi who happens to be the mother of the present petitioner. Learned counsel submits further that certain material facts were suppressed by the writ petitioner Sunita Devi in the writ application besides the fact related to the earlier writ application and also the fact that the deceased late Kedar Nath Sharma had specifically named his wife Chandrika Devi and his two sons as his nominees for receiving his retiral benefits and the nomination form does not include the name of Sunita Devi. Learned counsel adds further that the direction as contained in the order dated 22.09.2004, authorizing the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, Block Development Officer of Chatra and Simariya and the Accountant General, to conduct an inquiry to find out as to whether the lady Sunita Devi is the widow of late Kedar Nath Sharma and if she is found to be the widow of late Kedar Nath Sharma, then to pay the retiral benefits which was payable in the account of late Kedar Nath Sharma and if the inquiry does not confirm that the lady had any relationship with the deceased, then communicate such decision to the lady. Learned counsel argues that such a direction could not have been issued to the concerned officers. Furthermore, pursuant to the direction, though no report was submitted either by the Block Development Officer, Chatra and Simariya or even by the Accountant General, but a report seems to have been submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra and that too, on the basis of the report of Block Development Officer, Jahanabad, who was not at all authorized by the order of this court and by which Deputy Commissioner had issued instruction to the office of the Accountant General to pay the retiral benefits of Late Kedar Nath Sharma to the lady Sunita Devi. Learned counsel argues that since such a report has been submitted ex -parte behind the back of the petitioner, it has caused grave prejudice to the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, such anomalous situation has been created on account of the direction contained in the order dated 22.09.2004, whereby the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra has been authorized to conduct the inquiry and as such, the order needs to be appropriately modified to the extent that the authority given to the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra and Block Development Officer, Chatra and Simariya as also the Accountant General to conduct the inquiry and submit report regarding the relationship of Sunita Devi with late Kedar Nath Sharma, should be deleted from the order.
(3.) HAVING gone through the order dated 22.09.2004, and after hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any substance to make any modification in the order. The order has not decided any issue on merits, as raised by the petitioner Sunita Devi. Rather, the order has given a direction to certain responsible officers to conduct inquiry regarding the relationship of Sunita Devi with late Kedar Nath Sharma and to submit report. It appears from the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra had submitted a report and pursuant to the findings contained in the report, and on the basis of the instruction received, the office of the Accountant General had released substantial payment out of the retiral benefits which was payable in the account of late Kedar Nath Sharma, to the writ petitioner Sunita Devi. According to the learned counsel, the lady has usurped the entire property of the petitioner's father to which the lady was not at all entitled and even otherwise, she could not have deprived the petitioner of his share in his father's property.;