Gauhati High Court
Kiran Duwarah vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 4 April, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010065332022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2426/2022
KIRAN DUWARAH
S/O- LATE RAJANI KANTA DUWARAH
R/O- VILLAGE CHAULDHUWA
P.O AND P.S- CHAULDHUWA
DIST- SIBSAGAR, ASSAM, PIN- 785667
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY,TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
HANDLOOM TEXTILE AND SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006
3:THE DIRECTOR
HANDLOOM TEXTILE AND SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI
5:THE ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF SERICULTURE
DIST-SIBSAGAR
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM
PIN-785640
6:THE TREASURY OFFICER
DIST-SIBSAGAR
ASSAM
PIN-78564
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SERICULTURE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 04.04.2022
1. 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
01.04.1989.
2. The petitioner's service was regularised vide order dated 14.10.2005 w.e.f.
22.07.2005. The petitioner retired from service on 31.01.2012.
3. The petitioner has however not been given pension, on account of the fact that
that the petitioner had not completed 20 years of service as a Muster Roll Worker, after
deducting his initial six years of service as a Muster Roll Worker.
4. The petitioner's counsel submits that the present case is a covered case in terms of
the judgment and order dated 04.12.2018 passed in the case of Sanjita Roy & Ors Vs.
State of Assam & Ors. reported in 2019 2 GLT 805. He submits that if there is no
deduction of six years from the service of the petitioner, the petitioner would have had 22
years 10 months of service as a Muster Roll Worker.
5. The petitioner's counsel accordingly prays that a direction should be issued to the
respondent authorities to verify whether the petitioner had the bench mark of 20 years of
Page No.# 3/3
service as a Muster Roll Worker without deducting any period of service. If the service period
of the petitioner meets the bench mark of 20 years, the respondents should process the
pension papers of the petitioner for payment of pension.
6. Mr. R. Dhar, learned standing counsel for the Handloom, Textile and Sericulture
Department, Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel for the Finance Department and Ms. A.
Lala, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. B. Chakravorty, learned counsel for the respondent no.
4 fairly submit that the present case is covered by the judgment and order passed in
Sanjita Roy & Ors (Supra).
7. In view of the submission made by the counsels of the parties and on perusing the
judgment of this Court passed in Sanjita Roy & Ors (Supra), this Court finds that this case
is a covered matter. Accordingly, 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. If the respondent authorities find that the
petitioner had served for a period of 20 years as a Muster Roll Worker, without there being
any deduction of his service period as a Muster Roll Worker, then the petitioner should be
granted the benefit of pension.
8. The entire exercise should be completed within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, which shall be accompanied with a copy of the
writ petition.
9. The terminal gratuity already paid to the petitioner shall be adjusted from the
pension that may be payable to the petitioner.
10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
