Lipson Basumatary vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3484 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010183972022




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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/5955/2022

         LIPSON BASUMATARY
         S/O- LATE HARUN BASUMATARY, R/O- VILL.- NALBARI, P.O., P.S. AND
         DIST. UDALGURI, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN- 784509.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
         OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

         2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-06.

         3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
          IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
          2ND
          BLOCK-B
          KRISHNA NAGAR
          CHANDMARI
          GUWAHATI-03.

         4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)

          MAIDAMGAON
          BELTOLA
          GUWAHATI-29.

         5:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
          BODOFA NAGAR
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

             KOKRAJHAR
             DIST. KOKRAJHAR
             BTAD
             ASSAM
             PIN- 783370.

            6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DHANSIRI PROJECT DIVISION
             CANAL-I (IRRIGATION)
             UDALGURI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 784509.

            7:THE TREASURY OFFICER
             UDALGURI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 784509

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. K R PATGIRI

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA


                                          ORDER

Date : 12-09-2022

Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker in the establishment of the respondent No. 6 on 20.07.1988.

2. The petitioner's service was thereafter regularized as Khalasi vide Order dated 06.10.2005 w.e.f. 22.07.2005. The petitioner retired on 31.03.2009. The petitioner's prayer for grant of pension was however rejected, on the ground that he did not complete 20 years of service as a Muster Roll Worker, after Page No.# 3/4

deducting his initial 6 years of service as a Muster Roll Worker. The petitioner's counsel submits that the present case is covered by the judgment of this Court in Sanjita Roy & Others Vs. State of Assam & Others, 2019 2 GLT 805.

3. Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4, Ms. D.S. Neog, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 6, Ms. S. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Mr. R.K. Musahary, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 fairly submit that the present case is covered by the judgment of this Court in Sanjita Roy & Others (supra).

4. In the case of Sanjita Roy & Others (supra), this Court has held that the entire service period of a Muster Roll Worker has to be counted, while considering the continuous service period of a Muster Roll Worker. This Court further held that there cannot be deduction of any period of service as a Muster Roll Worker, while counting the qualifying years of service required for grant of pension.

5. In view of the decision of this Court in Sanjita Roy & Others (supra), the respondents are directed to determine the continuous service period of the petitioner as a Muster Roll Worker, without deducting any period of his service. If the petitioner's service as a Muster Roll Worker touches the 20 years mark, the respondents should process the pension papers of the petitioner for grant of pension. The entire exercise should be carried out within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The gratuity amount paid, if any, shall be adjusted against the pension payable to the petitioner.

Page No.# 4/4

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant