Judgment 1. Originally the case was registered as Miscellaneous Appeal but as per the order of this Court passed on 19.8.1999. the petitioners counsel has converted the Appeal into a Revision Application. 2. There is a chequered history of the case. The petitioner happens to be the husband of Lakshmi Devi, who was a service holder. She was alleged to be murdered by the petitioner and as such a criminal case was proceeded against the petitioner. The deceased Lakshmi Devi had four minor children through the petitioner. While the petitioner was in custody, Jagan Prasad, the Opposite Party posing himself to be the natural guardian and next friend of the four minor children filed Misc. Case No. 2 of 1999 for grant of succession certificate in respect of the debts and liabilities of the deceased Lakshmi Devi. Succession certificate was issued accordingly. The petitioner although he happens to be an heir of the deceased Lakshmi Devi had not been made party anywhere in the case nor notice was served on him. After release from custody on the ground of acquittal in the sessions trial the petitioner filed a petition under Section 383 of the Indian Succession Act for revocation of the succession certificate issued in favour of his four minor children being operated by the Opposite Party, Jagan Prasad. It is a condition that the revocation petition was kept in abeyance and subsequent orders had been passed in Succession Certificate Case No. 1 of 1998 by the learned court below and some of such orders had been annexed and impugned in this revision petition such as orders dated 30,7.1998 and subsequent orders dated 6.5.1999. 3. It is an admitted fact that the deceased Lakshmi Devi made nominations in her official papers in favour of her husband, that is, the petitioner and her four minor children but the succession certificate has been issued only in the name of four minor children. Practically after issuance of succession certificate the court issuing so becomes functus officio and there remains no scope for the court to pass any payment order to the parties who are the custodian or holding the money for and on behalf of the deceased. It is submitted that practically the whole amount had been disbursed in favour of the Opposite Party in the name of minor children. It is submitted that practically the whole amount had been disbursed in favour of the Opposite Party in the name of minor children. On the other hand in the counter affidavit filed it is stated that the bulk of the amount has been kept in F.D.f. for a long term in favour of the minor children and only a paltry sum has been expended by the Opposite Party for upbringing of the minor children. Be it what it may, the orders passed regarding payment etc. as mentioned above is beyond the scope and jurisdiction of the court issuing succession certificate, moreover, such orders should not be passed when already there was a petition filed for revocation of the succession certificate. The petitioner being the natural heir he is also entitled to a share in the money left by the deceased. The whole of the succession certificate in favour of the minor children may not be revocable but at least the petitioners share should be kept intact in favour of the petitioner himself. 4. Without going into the merit of the revocation petition filed it is hereby ordered and directed that the learned court below, that is, the 2nd Addl. District Judge, West Champaran should be restrained from passing any further order in the succession certificate case no. 1/1998 till an appropriate decision is arrived at in revocation petition filed under Section 383 of the Indian Succession Act by the petitioner and the money for which succession certificate has been issued may as it is or status quo in respect of the money as on today should be maintained till a decision is arrived at in the revocation petition. 5. The revision petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions.