Papari Barman vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3493 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010018732022




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/714/2022

            PAPARI BARMAN
            W/O- LATE PRAFULLA BARMAN, R/O- NARUWA, VILL.- BALIJAN
            CHARIALI, P.S. AND P.O. MUKALMUA, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR-06.

            2:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
             MAIDAMGAON
             BELTOLA
             GUWAHATI-781029
            ASSAM

            3:DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT AND CRAFTSMAN TRAINING
             GUWAHATI-08
             REHABARI
            ASSAM

            4:SUPERINTENDENT SKILL AND EMPLOYMENT AND ENTERPREUNOR
            DEPARTMENT
             INDUSTRIAL TRAINING INSTITUTE
             BARPETA-781301

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR MINTU SAIKIA

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
                                                                                         Page No.# 2/3

                                                 BEFORE
                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK


                                                 ORDER

31-08-2023

Heard Mr. M. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. P. Das, learned Standing counsel, Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4.

2. The judgment in favour of the husband of the petitioner was passed on 23.04.2015 in WP(C) No. 1424/2011 and other connected cases. It is seen that the Finance (SIU) Department under its U.O. No. FSI 525/2018 dated 27.07.2018 gave its approval with regard to the appointment of the husband of the petitioner, Prafulla Barman. Thereafter, the State Government in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department vide No. SKE. 93/2017/34 dated 03.08.2018 gave its approval for appointment of said Prafulla Barman and the satisfactory police verification report with regard to his appointment was of 23.10.2018 vide No. SB.IX/5/15/A/2018/103, but the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam, respondent No. 3 by order No. DET(E) 111/2015/433 dated 22.01.2019 appointed the husband of the petitioner as Grade-IV employee in the Industrial Training Institute (ITI), Barpeta, District-Barpeta under the Persons with Disabilities (PwD) quota, after more than 4 (four) months from the date of approval of the Government with regard to the appointment of the husband of the petitioner.

3. The husband of the petitioner, Prafulla Barman died-in-harness on 03.07.2019. The petitioner being the widow of said Prafulla Barman, Grade-IV employee in the ITI Barpeta, she filed representation on 29.11.2021 before the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Rehabari, Assam for release of her family pension and other benefits on the death of her husband. As nothing progress, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

4. By filing an affidavit on 14.09.2022, the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam, respondent No. 3, rejected the claim of the petitioner for her family pension and other benefits on the death of her husband stating that her husband was appointed with the specific provisions that his service condition will be governed by the New Pension Scheme, 2005 in terms of the communications of the Finance (B) Department of the State Nos. BW.3/2003/Pt-II/1 dated 25.01.2005 and BW. 3/2003/Pt/284 dated 09.06.2009.

Page No.# 3/3

5. Though the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam, respondent No. 3 in its said affidavit stated about the compassionate family pension scheme of the Government in lieu of compassionate appointment and at the same time, also stated that in terms of the said scheme, as the husband of the petitioner did not complete one year of service on his death on 03.07.2019, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefits of such compassionate family pension. But it can be seen from the appointment order of the husband of the petitioner issued under order No. DET(E) 111/2015/433 dated 22.01.2019 that the Finance (SIU) Department of the State on 27.07.2018 itself gave its approval pertaining to the appointment of the husband of the petitioner and that the State Government in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department on 03.08.2018 gave its approval for appointment of husband of the petitioner, whereas the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam issued the appointment order to him only on 22.01.2019.

6. Considering the approval of the Finance Department dated 27.07.2018 and the approval of the State Government in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department dated 03.08.2018, it can be well presumed that the process of appointment of the late husband of the petitioner was approved on 27.07.2018 itself and had said appointment to the husband of the petitioner would have given immediately thereafter, he would have completed one year of service as Grade-IV employee under the Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam at the time of his death on 03.07.2019.

7. As such, the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training, Assam, respondent No. 3 is directed to do the needful for the purpose of giving the benefits of compassionate family pension scheme of the State to the petitioner on the death of her husband, Prafulla Barman, in consultation with the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Skill, Employment and Entrepreneurship Department and further, if so required, with the Finance Department of the State as well as the Chief Secretary of the State.

8. List this matter on 04.10.2023.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant