Purabi Saikia Mahanta vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 17 Gua

                                                              Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010261972022




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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/8414/2022

         PURABI SAIKIA MAHANTA
         W/O- LATE NRIPEN MAHANTA,
         R/O- WARD NO. 07, NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN,
         PO AND PS- NORTH LAKHIMPUR,
         DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM,
         PIN- 787001.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
         OF ASSAM,
         AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT,
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

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

         3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          FINANCE DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-06.

         4:THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
         ASSAM
          KHANAPARA
          GUWAHATI- 22.

         5:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ( A AND E)
         ASSAM
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

             MAIDAMGAON
             BELTOLA

            GUWAHATI- 29.

            6:THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (FTS)
             SUKULIBHORIA
             NORTH- LAKHIMPUR
            ASSAM

            PIN- 787001.

            7:THE TREASURY OFFICER
             LAKHIMPUR TREASURY
             DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
            ASSAM

            PIN- 787001.

            8:SMTI. BULUMAI MAHANTA
             1ST WIFE OF LATE NRIPEN MAHANTA

            R/O- VILL. AND P.O.- KHALIHAMARI BARGHAT

            DISTRICT- SONITPUR
            ASSAM.
            PIN- 784026

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. K R PATGIRI

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AGRI. DEPARTMENT




                                 BEFORE
            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

                                          ORDER

Date : 02.01.2023

Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. G. Bora, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1, 4 and 6, being the authorities under the Agriculture Department of the Government of Assam. Also heard Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, being the authority under Page No.# 3/4

the Pension and Public Grievance Department, Mr. A. Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3 and 7, being the authorities under the Finance Department and Mr. A. Hassan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5, being the Accountant General (A&E), Assam.

2. Issue notice returnable by 6(six) weeks.

3. Extra copies within 3(three) days.

4. Petitioner to take steps upon the respondent No. 8 by way of Registered post with A/D within 3(three) days.

5. The petitioner Smt. Purabi Saikia Mahanta is admittedly the second wife of the deceased employee Nripen Mahanta who was serving as Deputy Director of Agriculture (FTS) at North Lakhimpur died in harness on 13.12.2012. On his death, the family pension is being paid to the respondent No. 8 Smt. Bulumani Mahanta, who is admittedly the first wife of the deceased employee Nripen Mahanta. The second wife Smt. Purabi Saikia Mahanta has filed this writ petition on the grievance that her to children through the deceased employee Nripen Mahanta namely, Sri Jenine Mahanta, who would be aged approximately 23 years as on today and Smt. Bhargabi Mahanta, who would be aged approximately 17 years as on today are not being given the benefits of the family pensionary benefits by the respondent No. 8.

6. We are not expressing any view on the claim of the son Sri Jenine Mahanta who is presently aged approximately 23 years but in respect of the daughter Smt. Bhargabi Mahanta, who is presently aged approximately 17 years and is unmarried would definitely be entitled for benefits of the family pensionary benefits under Rule 140 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. Although under the said Rules, family pension would be payable to the eldest of the surviving widow i.e. the respondent No. 8 but it has been held by Page No.# 4/4

this Court in its judgment and order dated 22.12.2022 in WA No. 160/2018, wherein it had been provided that the eldest surviving wife is paid the family pension as a trustee for benefit of all the other children of the deceased who may be entitled to the benefits of the family pension. From such point of view, if the respondent No. 8 is not giving the benefits of the family pension to the minor daughter of the deceased employee Nripen Mahanta, there prima facie appears to be a breach of trust by the respondent No. 8. Therefore on a prima facie case being made out and in order to expedite the matter, we direct that until further orders, family pension be not paid to the respondent No. 8 in respect of the deceased employee Nripen Mahanta. Upon appearance of the respondent No. 8, further consideration would be made as to what orders are necessary in the present writ petition.

List after 6(six) weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant