JUDGMENT : Vikas Budhwar, J. 1. Heard Sri Virendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that the husband of the writ petitioner was an employee in State Government, working on the post of Assistant Accountant, retired on 31.02.2020 and expired on 14.06.2020. The writ petitioner claims to release of the family pension which was granted on 16.07.2020 which has been stopped by the authority since November, 2024 till date. 3. Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider the claim. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the writ petitioner needs adjudication at the first instance by the second respondent, District Magistrate, Budaun. 5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he gracefully accepts the same. 6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self-attested copy of the writ petition before the second respondent, who shall on the receipt of the same within a period of two weeks, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. In case the second respondent is of the opinion that the matter is to be decided by some other authorities then the papers shall be transmitted to the same. 7. Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off.