ORDER : The petitioner has sought for a direction to respondent to release the withholding pension amount of the petitioner considering the representations dated 28.12.2015 and 29.02.2016 as per Annexures – B and C respectively. 2. The petitioner claims to be the legally wedded wife of deceased – P. Veerendra Patil who was working under the respondent and he died on 25.11.2004 after taking voluntary retirement. 3. Smt. Anju, Shivani and Vaibhavi claiming to be the second wife and children of deceased – P. Veerendra Patil filed O.S.No.451/2005 against the petitioner (defendant No.1) and others and the said suit was decreed as under: “The suit filed by plaintiffs is hereby decreed. It is hereby declared that plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are the legal heirs of deceased Veerendra Patil, born out of the wedlock of plaintiff No.1 and deceased Veerendra Patil. It is further hereby declared that, plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are entitled for 50% of the pension benefits of deceased Veerendra Patil. The 3rd defendant is hereby restrained by way of permanent injunction not to disburse the 50% of the pension benefits in favour of defendants No.1 and 2.” 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that under the Regulations of the respondent – KEB, no pensionary benefits could be awarded to the children of second wife (illegitimate children). Hence, the petitioner is entitled to the full pensionary benefits. The representation submitted by the petitioner regarding the same has been rejected referring to the decree passed in O.S.No.451/2005. Hence, seeks for interference of this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent supports the endorsement dated 16.04.2016 at Annexure – D. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed firstly, for the reason that the necessary and proper parties are not arrayed as parties to the proceedings. Secondly, the decree passed in OS..No.451/2005 has reached finality. Indeed, the petitioner has participated in the suit proceedings and has suffered an order. Having accepted the same, the petitioner now cannot rise from the slumber to challenge the judgment and decree indirectly by way of writ petition which is wholly misconstrued. 7. The petitioner is estopped from claiming the full pensionary benefits in terms of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.451/2005. Having accepted the same, the petitioner now cannot rise from the slumber to challenge the judgment and decree indirectly by way of writ petition which is wholly misconstrued. 7. The petitioner is estopped from claiming the full pensionary benefits in terms of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.451/2005. Considering the same, the respondent has rightly rejected the request of the petitioner which cannot be faulted with. Writ petition is devoid of merits, accordingly stands dismissed.