[1] Heard Ld. Counsel Ms. Uttara Sinha for the petitioner.

[2] Grievance of the petitioner is that she is the first wife of the deceased Government employee, namely, Lt. Satya Bhusan Deb, but, family pension was initially granted to respondent no.7, Smt. Purnima Deb, who was his second wife. Thereafter, on objection raised by the petitioner, payment of family pension was stopped. Thereafter, the petitioner filed writ petition bearing No. WP(C) 1068 of 2019 which was disposed of on 25.11.2019, asking the petitioner to approach Civil Court as disputed question of facts were involved. Ld. Counsel Smt. Sinha submits that thereafter, the matter has been settled between the petitioner and said respondent no.7, and it is agreed by them that family pension will be received by the petitioner. But despite the same, same has not been granted by the other respondents to the petitioner. She, thereafter, submitted representations to the Executive Engineer, Transmission Division, Public Works Department on 17.12.2024 and to the Secretary, PWD on 18.12.2024 and further, to the Executive Engineer, Electric Stores Division on 24.12.2024. But despite more than 1 year has elapsed, said representations have not been responded to and therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

[3] Ld. Addl. GA, Mr. Mangal Debbarma appears and accepts notice for respondent nos.1 to 3. Ld. Sr. Counsel, Mr. B. N. Majumder appears and accepts notice for respondent nos.4 and 5 and Ld. Counsel Mr. A. Chakraborty appears and accepts notice for respondent no.6.

[4] Ld. Counsel, Smt. Sinha submits that the petitioner is income less and for a long period, she is not receiving the family pension which is leading her to severe financial crisis.

[5] Ld. Sr. Counsel, Mr. B. N. Majumder submits that the petitioner was an employee of respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and without any valid reason respondent nos.4 and 5 have been made the parties herein, though the petitioner was not an employee of TSECL.

[6] Ld. Addl. GA, Mr. Mangal Debbarma and Ld. Counsel Mr. A. Chakraborty submit that they have no objection if the case is disposed of at this stage with a direction to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to dispose of her representations in accordance with law after taking into account the subsequent development i.e. the settlement arrived at between the parties.

[7] Considered the submissions.

[8] The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to consider the representations of the petitioner as submitted earlier and as indicated above, in accordance with law with a reasoned order taking into account the subsequent development, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

[9] Liberty is also given to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum again, if further grievances persist.

[10] IA(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.