Sofika Begum vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1413 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010067822021




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/2638/2021

         SOFIKA BEGUM
         W/O MD. TOZBUL HOQUE, R/O VILL. HASILAPARA, P.O. AND P.S.
         GOALPARA, DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN 783101



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
         ASSAM, INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPTT., GUWAHATI 6

         2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

          PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT.
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI 6

         3:THE DIRECTOR

          INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPTT.
          ASSAM
          GUWAHATI 7

         4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
          MAIDAMGAON
          BELTOLA
          GUWAHATI 29

         5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

          INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION
          GUWAHATI 7
          ASSAM.
                                                                                  Page No.# 2/3


            6:THE ASSTT. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

             INLAND WATER TRANSPORT SUB DIVISION GOALPARA
             ASSAM
             PIN 783101

            7:THE TREASURY OFFICER

             GOALPARA TREASURY
             DIST. GOALPARA
             ASSAM
             PIN 78310

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. K R PATGIRI

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IWT




                                    BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

                                            ORDER

Date : 09.04.2021

Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.D. Bora, learned Govt. advocate for the respondent no.1, 2 and 3, Mr. A. Hussain, learned standing counsel for the respondent nos. 4, and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned standing counsel for respondent no. 7.

The petitioner was initially appointed as Muster Roll worker in the office of respondent no. 5 on 01.02.1993 and his service was regularized as Grade-IV employee w.e.f. 22.07.2005 and he had superannuated on 31.03.2017 and on denial of retirement benefits and pension, the petitioner had approached this Court.

This Court by virtue of judgment and order passed in the case of Sanjita Roy Vs. The State of Assam & Ors. (2019) 4 GLR 97, had already held the deduction of 6 years of service as Muster Roll is impermissible. Therefore, without deduction of 6 years, the petitioner would have rendered 24 years and 2 months of service, as such, he would be entitled to pensionary benefits.

Page No.# 3/3

Accordingly, in terms of ratio laid down in case of Sanjita Roy (supra), this writ petition stands disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to work out the pensionery benefits in favour of the petitioner and release the same within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

It is also clarified that if any terminal benefit has been paid to the petitioner, such payment may be adjusted at the time of finalization of the pension.

This writ petition stands allowed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant