Gauhati High Court
Manik Patra vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 3 December, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010147002021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4821/2021
MANIK PATRA
S/O LATE DUTIRAM PATRA, VILL. HOLONGAPARA GOHAIN GAON, P.O.
KOPRADHORA, P.S. TEOK, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN 785112
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. 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
JORHAT DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
PIN 7785001
6:THE TREASURY OFFICER
JORHAT TREASURY
DIST. JORHAT (ASSAM)
PIN 78500
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
03.12.2021
Heard Shri U Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri N Upadhyay, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 3 and 5. Also heard Ms. A Talukdar, learned
State Counsel, Assam for the respondent no. 2 whereas the respondent no. 4 is represented
by Ms. M Barman, learned counsel.
Considering the subject matter and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties,
the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.
At the outset, it is jointly submitted that the issue involved has already been
adjudicated in a number of writ petitions, including WP(C) 1089/2015 [Sanjita Roy v.
State of Assam and Others, reported in 2009 (2) GLT 805] whereby this Court has held
that while calculating the 20 years of qualifying service, there should not be any deduction.
The petitioner was serving as a Muster Roll Worker under the Executive Engineer,
Jorhat Division Irrigation, Jorhat. It is the case of the petitioner that he has joined the
Department on 01.04.1990 and was regularized as Chowkidar w.e.f. 22.07.2005. On attaining
the age of superannuation and after rendering his continuous service, the petitioner had
retired on 31.10.2013. After such retirement, other than his terminal gratuity of Rs.
1,24,194/-, no other amount has been paid to him. The ground for such denial is non-
completion of 20 years of qualifying service.
Page No.# 3/3
As observed above, this Court has already held in similar cases that while calculating
the 20 years of qualifying service for the purpose of being eligible for post retirement benefits
for a Muster Roll / Work Charged Worker, whose services were subsequently regularized,
there should not be any deduction for the period served prior to such regularization. It is
further submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 26.02.2021 has further
explained that the benefits would be from the date of their superannuation and not from the
judgment as this was issue in another connected case namely WA 18/2021 [Binapani Das
vs. State of Assam & Ors.].
Considering the above, the present writ petition is disposed of by directing that the
benefits granted to the petitioners in the bunch of cases including WP(C)/1089/2015 vide the
judgment dated 04.12.2018 is also granted to the petitioner. The benefit is to be given from
the date of attaining superannuation as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench.
The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
