The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a second wife seeking succession and job benefits for her son, noting that a state order incorrectly identified her as the third wife of the deceased, thereby warranting denial of relief.
The writ petition was dismissed and consigned to the records.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 935 of 2022
Petitioner :- Smt. Geeta Raikwar Respondent :- The State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
The admitted fact in the instant writ petition is that the petitioner is the second wife of the deceased Vishnu Narayan. However, the order which has been passed by the respondent on 17.08.2021 shows that the petitioner is the third wife of the deceased. What is more the petitioner has claimed a job for her son who was adopted by her after the death of the deceased Vishnu Narayan.
Under such circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed and is consigned to the records.
Order Date :- 23.3.2022 vkj
Digitally signed by VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL Date: 2022.03.23 18:11:07 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a second wife claiming succession and job benefits for an adopted son is entitled to relief when a state order incorrectly identifies her as the third wife.
Whether the discrepancy between claimed widowhood and the state's recognition bars relief.
Smt. Geeta Raikwar
The State Of U P
Siddhartha Varma
Vijay Krishna Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
