Gauhati High Court
Sushma Dakua vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 3 May, 2023
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010088612023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2304/2023
SUSHMA DAKUA
W/O LT. ANNA RAM DAKUA R/O VILL. PIPLIBARI P.O. HARIBHANGA DIST.
NALBARI ASSAM PIN 781378
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCE DEPTT.
ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
3:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
4:THE COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR SIXMILE
GUWAHATI 37
5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION
ASSAM
HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
NALBARI ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND DIST. NALBARI ASSAM PIN 781335
7:TREASURY OFFICER
TIHU SUB TREASURY TIHU P.O. TIHU DIST NALBARI ASSAM PIN 78137
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ISLAM
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
Date : 03.05.2023
Heard Mr. M. Islam, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and Mr. N. K. Debnath, the learned Standing counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 6. I have also heard Ms. M. D. Borah,
the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 & 5
and Ms. R. M. Baruah, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent Nos. 3 & 7.
2. Issue notice making it returnable on 31.05.2023.
3. As the respondents are duly represented by their respective learned
counsels, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon them during the
course of the day.
4. The case of the petitioner herein is that the husband of the petitioner was
appointed in the respondent No.1 department on 20.05.1963 and he retired on
30.11.1999. The husband of the petitioner rendered service of 36 years 6
months and 10 days. However, for the purpose of calculating the net qualifying
service, a period of 12 years 9 months 20 days was excluded and thereby the
net qualifying service for the purpose of computation of the pension has been
taken as 23 years 8 months 25 days.
5. It is the further case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner
Page No.# 3/3
expired on 25.12.2009 and during his lifetime, he did not get any pension.
However, in the year 2011, the family pension has been paid to the petitioner
but as the period of qualifying service have been reduced by 12 years 9 months
20 days which is in conflict with the judgment of the Division Bench in the case
of State of Assam and Another Vs. Syed Md. Fazlay Rabbi in Writ Appeal
No.145/2009 dated 24.03.2010, the petitioner has been pursuing before the
respondent authorities for giving the benefit from the date of the initial
appointment of the husband of the petitioner.
6. The respondents are directed to apprise this Court on the next returnable
date as to whether the excluding of the period of 12 years 9 months 20 days
while computing the total qualifying period is in conformity with the judgment of
the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Syed Md. Fazlay Rabbi (supra).
7. List accordingly.
8. Liberty is given to the petitioner to mention the matter for upgrading.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
