Gauhati High Court
Ebaran Nessa vs The State Of Assam And 9 Ors on 29 November, 2023
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010184942023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4869/2023
EBARAN NESSA
W/O- LT. ABDUL BARIK PARAMANIK, VILL- NAYER ALGA PT. III.,P.O.
NAYER ALGA, P.S. BILASIPARA, DISTRICT- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783348
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM, DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GHY-6
3:THE DIRECTOR
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GHY-19
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DHUBRI
ASSAM
P.O. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI
PIN- 783301
5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION
ASSAM
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
DISPUR
GHY-6
Page No.# 2/5
6:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI-29
7:THE TREASURY OFFICER
BILASIPARA TREASURY OFFICE
BILASIPARA
DIST.- DHUBRI
ASSAM
8:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 783301
9:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 783348
10:ROKIYA KHATUN
D/O- LT. AYNAL HOQUE
R/O- VILL- DIPURKUTI
P.O. BILASIPARA
P.S. BILASIPARA
DIST.- DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 78334
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MONDAL
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
29.11.2023
Heard Mr. M.U. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms.
Page No.# 3/5
J. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General (A&E), Mr. B. Talukdar,
learned counsel for the Department of School Education and Mr. M. Khan,
learned counsel for the respondent no.10. None appears for the Director of
Pension.
The petitioner and the private respondent no.10 are the first wife and the
second wife respectively of one late Abdul Barik Paramanik, who was employed
as a Head Teacher of 2414 No. Bhati Nayeralga Lower Primary (L.P.) School in
the Bilasipara Education Block of District-Dhubri. The petitioner's husband died
on 14.02.2023 while in service. On an application submitted by the petitioner,
the pension was released to the petitioner. However, subsequently, the
respondent no.10, who claims to be the second wife of the late Abdul Barik
Paramanik, filed an objection before the competent authority and thereafter, the
pension of the petitioner has been stopped by the authority concerned. Being
aggrieved, the present writ petitioner is before this Court.
The petitioner submits that in view of the Hon'ble Full Bench's judgment
of this Court passed in W.A. No.160/2018 ( Mustt Junufa Bibi vs. Mustt Padma
Begum @ Padma Bibi & 4 Ors.) on 22.12.2022, the respondent no. 10 has not
right to claim for pension.
Per contra, Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent no.10 submits
Page No.# 4/5
that penultimate paragraph of the Full Bench Judgment passed in W.A.
No.160/2018 on 22.12.2022 provides that the second wife may be given an
opportunity to redress her grievances before the competent authority and
thereupon, may bifurcate or segregate the pension. It is under such
circumstances, the pension of the petitioner has been stopped as the matter is
under process.
Considering the issues having been settled by the Full Bench in its
judgment and order dated 22.12.2022 passed in W.A. No.160/2018 (Mustt
Junufa Bibi vs. Mustt Padma Begum @ Padma Bibi & 4 Ors.) , this Court does not
consider it necessary to retain the matter due to lack of instructions coming
from the respondent Department. A copy of the representation dated
11.08.2023 addressed to the Director of Pension has been enclosed to the writ
petition as Annexure-4. It is submitted that this representation has not been
redressed by the Department.
In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of by
directing the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Director of Pension
i.e. the respondent no.5 to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner
after hearing the petitioner in this regard. It is further directed that while
disposing of the representation, the Director of Pension will take into
Page No.# 5/5
consideration the judgment and order dated 22.12.2022 passed in W.A.
No.160/2018 (Mustt Junufa Bibi vs. Mustt Padma Begum @ Padma Bibi & 4
Ors.). The claims of the parties may be addressed in terms of the provisions of
Rule 143 of the Pension Rules, 1969. Thereafter, the Director of Pension will
pass necessary speaking order within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the above.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
