Gauhati High Court
Putula Deka vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 28 March, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010053232022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2131/2022
PUTULA DEKA
W/O. LT. BIHU RAM DEKA @ BISHNU RAM DEKA, VILL. NO.1
PUHURABARI, P.O. RAWTA, P.S. RAWTA, DIST. UDALGURI, BTAD, ASSAM,
PIN-784508.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION
DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY.
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-06.
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION DEPTT.
2ND BLOCK-B
KRISHNA NAGAR
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-03.
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI-29.
5:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
Page No.# 2/4
REP. BY THE SECY. IRRIGATION DEPTT.
BODOFANAGAR KOKRAJHAR
DIST. KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM
PIN-783370.
6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
DHANSIRI PROJECT DIVISION
CANAL-1 (IRRIGATION)
UDALGURI
DIST. UDALGURI
BTAD
ASSAM
PIN-784509.
7:THE TREASURY OFFICER
UDALGURI
DIST. UDALGURI
BTAD
ASSAM
PIN-784509
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
28.03.2022
Heard Ms. U. Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner, who
submits that the petitioner's husband was engaged as a Muster Roll
Worker in the Office of the respondent no.6 on 01.12.1991. The service
of the petitioner's husband was regularized vide Office order dated
06.10.2015 w.e.f. 22.07.2005. The petitioner's husband retired from
service on 31.01.2014 and expired on 21.07.2014. The petitioner's
grievance is that she has not been paid the family pension or the
Page No.# 3/4
pension payable to her deceased husband, on the ground that the
petitioner's husband had not completed 20 years of service as a Muster
Roll Worker, after deducting the initial 6 years of service.
2. Ms. U. Hazarika, 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. She
submits that the entire service period of the petitioner's husband as
Muster Roll worker will have to be counted as per the judgment in
Sanjita Roy (supra) and if it is found that petitioner's husband had
completed 20 years of service, without deduction of the initial 6 years of
service, the petitioner should be granted family pension and the pension
payable to her deceased husband.
3. Mr. N. Upadhaya, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 3 &
6; Mr. J.K. Parajuli, learned counsel for the respondent no.2; R.K.
Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent no.4; Mr. S.R. Rava,
learned counsel for the respondent no.5 and Mr. P. Nayak learned
counsel for the respondent no.7 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 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 pension payable to her
deceased husband. The entire exercise should be completed within a
Page No.# 4/4
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/petitioner, if any, shall be adjusted from the family
pension/pension payable to the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
