Smt. Susama Dutta vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2135 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010115322022




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/3940/2022

         SMT. SUSAMA DUTTA
         W/O- LATE DIMBESWAR DUTTA, R/O- VILL.- HAHCHARA, P.O.
         ANGERKHOWA, P.S. PANIGAON, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM, PIN- 787031.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
         REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT ASSAM
         SACHIBALAYA, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

         2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
         ASSAM SACHIBALAYA
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-6.

         3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
          IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
          CHANDMARI
          GUWAHATI-3.

         4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LAKHIMPUR DIVISION
          (IRRIGATION)
          P.O. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
          DIST. LAKHIMPUR
         ASSAM
          PIN- 787001.

         5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          LAKHIMPUR WEST SUB-DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
          JAPISAJIA
                                                               Page No.# 2/4

             P.O. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
             DIST. LAKHIMPUR
             ASSAM
             PIN- 787031.

             6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
              DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
             ASSAM SACHIBALAYA
              DISPUR
              GUWAHATI-781006.

             7:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
              MAIDAMGAON
              BELTOLA
              KAMRUP(M)
             ASSAM
              GUWAHATI-781029

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S DAS

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                            ORDER

15.06.2022

Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner's husband was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker w.e.f. 01.05.1988 in the establishment of the respondent no.4. The service of the petitioner's husband was regularized, vide order dated 06.10.2005 issued by the respondent no.4, w.e.f. 22.07.2005. The petitioner's husband retired from service on 30.04.2014 and expired on 23.06.2015. The petitioner's grievance is that she has not been paid the family pension or the arrear pension payable to her deceased husband, on the ground that the petitioner's husband had not completed 20 years Page No.# 3/4

of service as a Muster Roll Worker, after deducting the initial 6 years of service. The petitioner's counsel thus prays for payment of arrear pension and family pension to the petitioner.

2. Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case is covered by the judgment passed in Sanjita Roy & Ors. vs. State of Assam and Others, reported in 2019 (2) GLT 895. He submits that entire service period of the petitioner's husband as a Muster Roll worker will have to be counted, for the purpose of grant of pension in terms of the judgment in Sanjita Roy (supra) and if it is found that petitioner's husband, as a Muster Roll worker, completed 20 years of service without deduction of the initial 6 years of service, the petitioner should be granted family pension and the arrear pension payable to her deceased husband.

3. Ms. D.S. Neog, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5; Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and Mr. A. Hassan, learned counsel for the respondent no. 7 fairly submit that the present case is covered by the judgment of this Court in Sanjita Roy (supra).

4. In view of the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and keeping in view of the judgment of this Court in Sanjita Roy (supra), the respondent authorities are directed to determine the continuous length of service of the petitioner's husband as a Muster Roll worker, without any deduction of his service period. If such service period reaches the bench mark of 20 years, the benefit of family pension should be made available to the petitioner along with the arrear pension payable to her deceased husband. The entire exercise should be Page No.# 4/4

completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The terminal gratuity already paid to the petitioner's husband or to the petitioner shall be adjusted from the family pension and arrear pension payable to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant