Gauhati High Court
Dulari Dewri vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 1 December, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010193322021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6324/2021
DULARI DEWRI
W/O LATE AKONMAN DEWRI, R/O VILL. MAHGURI, P.O. RAJAPATHAR, P.S.
BAKALIA, PIN 782460, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPL. SECY. TO THE
GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS ROAD DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 06
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 06
4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS ROAD DEPTT.
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI 03
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
P.W.D. BAKULIA ROADS DIVISIONAL
BAKALIA
Page No.# 2/4
PIN 782460
6:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI 2
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H TALUKDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
01.12.2021
Heard Mr. H Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that
the petitioner's husband was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker in the office of
the respondent No.5 on 15.05.1985 and his service was regularized as a Grade
IV Muster Roll Worker, vide letter No.ADT.71/2005/133 dated 30.09.2005, w.e.f.
22.07.2005.
2. The petitioner's husband retired from service on 31.01.2009 after serving
for 20 years 02 months and 07 days. The petitioner's husband retired on
31.01.2009 and expired on 10.02.2012. Though the petitioner submitted
necessary papers for family pension, the same has not been processed on the
ground that the petitioner's husband has not completed 20 years of service,
after deducting the initial six years of service as a Muster Roll Worker.
Page No.# 3/4
3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the present case is a covered case, in
terms of Sanjita Roy and Others Vs. State of Assam and Others, reported in
2019 (2) GLT 805. The petitioner's counsel submits that as per the case of
Sanjita Roy (supra), the entire service period of the petitioner's husband, as
Muster Roll Worker, has to be counted to see whether the Muster Roll Worker
had completed 20 years of service. He, accordingly, submits that a direction
should be issued to the respondent authorities to verify as to whether the
petitioner's husband had served as a Muster Roll Worker for 20 years without
deduction of the initial six years of service.
4. Mr. JK Parajuli, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, Mr. P
Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2, Ms. S Kemprai,
learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 & 5 and Mr. B Chakravarty,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.6 fairly submit that the
present case is covered by the judgment and order passed in Sanjita Roy
(supra).
5. On perusing the regularization order, it appears that the petitioner's
husband's name is reflected in Sl.No.25 of Annexure-A of the letter dated
30.09.2005 issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, PWD
(Audit Branch).
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties
and keeping in view the judgment and order passed in Sanjita Roy (supra), the
respondent authorities are directed to determine and verify the continuous
Page No.# 4/4
length of service of the petitioner's husband as Muster Roll Worker, without any
deduction being made with regard to his initial service period as Muster Roll
Worker. If such service period of the petitioner's husband meets the bench mark
of 20 years, the benefit of pension should be made available to the petitioner.
7. The entire exercise should be completed within a period of 3(three) months
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
8. The terminal gratuity paid to the petitioner shall be adjusted from the
pension payable to the petitioner, if any.
9. Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
