Gauhati High Court
Minaram Bora @ Mina Ram Bora vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 23 April, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010094362020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2837/2020
MINARAM BORA @ MINA RAM BORA
S/O- LATE CHAMPAK BORA, R/O- VILL- NAMGAON, P.O- BORBHOGIA, P.S-
ULUWANI, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782138
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM,
IRRIGATION DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 6
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION DEPTT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI- 03
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI- 29
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NAGAON DIVISION(IRRIGATION)
NAGAON DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001
6:THE ASSTT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
JAKHALABANDHA ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
JAKHALABANDHA DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 781136
7:THE TREASURY OFFICER NAGAON TREASURY
DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 78200
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORDER
Date : 23.04.2021
Heard Mr. K. R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Also heard Mr. N. Upadhyaya, learned standing counsel, Irrigation Department, Government of
Assam, representing respondents No. 1, 3, 5 & 6; Mr. A. Hasan, learned counsel, representing
respondent No. 4; and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned counsel, representing respondent No. 7.
The service of the writ petitioner, who had served as Muster Roll Worker, w.e.f. 01.07.1989,
under the Executive Engineer, Kaliabor, and IND. Kollong Electrical Division(Irrigation), Nagaon,
Assam, was regularized by the authorities, vide order, dated 06.10.2005, issued by the Executive
Engineer, Kaliabor, and IND. Kollong Electrical Division(Irrigation), Nagaon, Assam, w.e.f. 22.07.2005.
The petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2010, after having
rendered 21 years and 1 month of service.
The petitioner, having rendered more than 21 years of service as Muster Roll Worker, in the
aforesaid Department, has put to challenge, the Office Memorandum, dated 20.05.2009, issued by the
Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Pension and Public Grievances Department, vide
Memo. No. PPG.(P)88/2009/2-A; whereby the initial period of 6 years service as Muster Roll Worker,
was sought to be deducted.
It is the case of the petitioner that the O.M., dated 20.05.2009, impugned in this writ petition,
insofar as it seeks to deduct the initial period of 6 years service as Muster Roll Worker, have been held
to be arbitrary and accordingly set aside by this Court in a decision rendered on 04.12.2018 in
WP(c)1089/2015 along with a series of analogous writ petitions.
Page No.# 3/3
Though no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by any of the respondents, the learned
counsels appearing for the respondents do not dispute the correctness of the contentions raised by
the petitioner.
In that view of the matter, as the Office Memorandum, dated 20.05.2009, issued by the
Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Pension and Public Grievances Department, vide
Memo. No. PPG.(P)88/2009/2-A, having already been set aside by this Court in WP(c)1089/2015 vide
judgment & order, dated 04.12.2018, there is no further requirement of this Court to again set aside
the Office Memorandum, dated 20.05.2009, issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Pension and Public Grievances Department, impugned in this writ petition.
However, the petitioner shall be entitled to the pensionery and other retirement benefits
without deduction of initial period of 6 years service as Muster Roll Worker, as have been held by this
Court in WP(c)1089/2015, referred to hereinabove.
Situated thus, the respondents are directed to work-out the pensionery benefits of the writ
petitioner in accordance with the decision rendered by this Court in WP(c)1089/2015 within a period
of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
While determining the pension of the petitioner, the respondents would be at liberty to adjust
the terminal benefits which has already paid to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands allowed and disposed of, in terms above.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
