Gauhati High Court
Abu Naser Mohed Ali vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 24 March, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010055682021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2103/2021
ABU NASER MOHED ALI
S/O- LT. MAHSEN ALI, R/O- VILL- ALI PARA, P.S. AND P.O. GOALPARA
DIST.- GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN- 783101
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION
DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-6
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION DEPTT.
CHANDMARI
GHY-03
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GHY-29
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
GOALPARA MECHANICAL DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
DIST.- GOALPARA
ASSAM
PIN- 783101
Page No.# 2/3
6:THE TREASURY OFFICER
GOALPARA TREASURY
DIST.- GOALPARA
(ASSAM)
PIN- 78310
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 24-03-2021
Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the
petitioner was engaged as a Muster Roll worker in the office of the respondent No. 5 on
01.02.1992. The petitioner's service was thereafter regularized w.e.f. 22.07.2005. The
petitioner retired from service on 31.03.2012. The petitioner thereafter submitted his pension
papers. However, the same had not been processed on the ground that the petitioner had not
completed 20 years of service.
2. He submits that the present case is a covered case and in terms of the judgment and
order dated 04.12.2018 passed in the case of Sanjita Roy and Others vs. State of Assam and
Others, (WP(C) 1089/2015), the entire service period of the petitioner as a Muster Roll
worker has to be verified to see whether the Muster Roll worker had completed 20 years of
service. He accordingly submits that if there is no deduction of 6 years of service from the
petitioner's entire service period as a Muster Roll worker, the petitioner would have completed
25 years of service. He accordingly submits that a direction should be issued to the
respondent authorities to verify whether the petitioner had the benchmark of 20 years of
Page No.# 3/3
service as a Muster Roll worker, without deducting any year of service as a Muster Roll worker
and if the petitioner had 20 years of continuous service as a Muster Roll worker, the
respondents should process the pension papers of the petitioner for payment.
3. Ms. M.D. Borah appearing for respondent No. 2, Mr. B. Gogoi appearing for
respondent No. 6, Mr. N. Upadhyay appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 5 and Mr. R. Dhar
appearing for respondent No. 4 fairly submit that the present case is covered by the
judgment and order dated 04.12.2018 passed in the case of Sanjita Roy (supra).
4. In view of the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and keeping in view
the judgment and order dated 04.12.2018 passed in Sanjita Roy and Others vs. State of
Assam and Others (WP(C) 1089/2015), the respondent authorities are directed to determine
the continuous length of service of the petitioner as a Muster Roll worker, without any
deduction of his service period as a Muster Roll worker and if such service period meets the
benchmark of 20 years, the benefit of pension should be made available to the petitioner. The
counting of 20 years will include the entire period of Muster Roll service i.e. prior to
regularization and after regularization. The exercise should be completed within a period of 3
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The terminal gratuity already
paid to the petitioner shall be adjusted from the pension payable to the petitioner, if any.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
