Gauhati High Court
Murlidhar Kalwar vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 12 March, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010022922021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1612/2021
MURLIDHAR KALWAR
S/O- LT. PARSHUPATI KALWAR, R/O- GABHARUBHETI, P.O.
GABHARUBHETI, P.S. PHILLOBARI, DIST.- TINSUKIA, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC
HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-6
3:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-6
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GHY-29
ASSAM
5:THE SENIOR ACCOUNT OFFICER
O/O THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GHY-29
ASSAM
6:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
Page No.# 2/3
PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING
HENGRABARI
GHY-36
7:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING
TINSUKIA DIVISION
TINSUKIA
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P H E
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 12.03.2021
Heard Mr. R. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that
the petitioner was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker in the office of the respondent No.
7 on 01.07.1991. The petitioner's service was regularized vide order dated 24.10.2005
w.e.f. 22.07.2005. The petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2016. The petitioner
thereafter submitted his pension papers. However, the same has not been processed
on the ground that the petitioner had not completed 20 years of service, after
deducting the initial 6 years of service as Muster Roll Worker.
He also submits that petitioner's 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) No.1089/2015), the entire service period of the
petitioner as Muster Roll Worker has to be verified to see whether the Muster Roll
Worker had completed 20 years of continuous service. He submits that by including
the initial 6 years of service in 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 authority to verify whether
Page No.# 3/3
the petitioner had the benchmark of 20 years as a Muster Roll Worker and if it is found
that the petitioner had 20 years of continuous service as a Muster Roll Worker, the
respondents should process the pension papers of the petitioner.
Mr. R. R. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1, 6 & 7, Mr. R.
Borpujari, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for
the respondent No.3 and Mr. A. Hassan, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5
submit that they have no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner's counsel,
inasmuch as, the present case is covered by the judgment and order dated 04.12.2018
passed in the case of Sanjita Roy -Vs- State of Assam (WP(C) No.1089/2015).
In view of the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and keeping in
view of the judgment dated 04.12.2018 passed in WP(C) 1089/2015 (Sanjita Roy and
Others vs. State of Assam and Others), this writ petition is disposed of with a direction
to the respondent authority to determine the continuous length of service of the
petitioner as a Muster Roll Worker, for payment of pension, after verifying whether the
service of the petitioner meets the benchmark of 20 years, without any deduction of
his service period. The counting of 20 years of service will include the entire period of
service as Muster Roll Worker, that is prior to regularization and after regularization of
his service. The terminal gratuity already paid to the petitioner shall be adjusted from
the pension payable to the petitioner, if any. The entire exercise should be completed
within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
