Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 14 February, 2025
Author: Nelson Sailo
Bench: Nelson Sailo
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010012792025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/399/2025
BISWAJIT BUJARBARUAH AND ANR
S/O LATE RATNESWAR BUJARBARUAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-
JAYANTIPUR, POST OFFICE-PITAMBARHAT, POLICE STATION-RANGIA,
DISTRICT-KAMRUP,ASSAM, PIN-781354
2: ANIMA DAS
W/O SRI BANESWAR ROY
RESIDENT OF FATASHIL AMBARI
BATHOU MANDIR PATH HOUSE NO-28
DHIRENPARA
GUWAHATI DISTRICT-KAMRUP(M)
PIN- 781025
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNEMNT OF
ASSAM
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS TRAINING AND PENSION AND PUBLIC
GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION
Page No.# 2/4
ASSAM
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-3
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
GUWAHATI MECHANICAL DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
GUWAHATI-3
DISTRICT KAMRUP (METRO)
ASSAM
6:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI-29
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. C BHATTACHARYYA, MR R DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION, SC, AG,SC, FINANCE DEPTT.,GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
14.02.2025
Heard Mr. C Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. P
Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department for respondent No. 2 and
Mr. N Upadhaya, learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department appearing for
respondent Nos. 1, 4 & 5. Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Addl. Senior
Government Advocate for respondent No. 3 and Mr. B Chakraborty, learned
Standing Counsel, AG, Assam. Having regard to the projection made by the
petitioners, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage.
Page No.# 3/4
[2.] It is the case of the petitioner No. 1 that he was initially appointed as
casual Muster Roll worker under the establishment of respondent No. 5 on
07.05.1990 and similarly, the respondent No. 2 was also appointed on
09.11.1990. Their service was regularized as Helper w.e.f. 22.07.2005. After
serving for more than 32 years, both the petitioners retired from service on
superannuation on 30.11.2022 & 30.04.2023 respectively. It is the case of the
petitioner that although they have been given pension but the respondent
authorities have deducted 6 years as non-qualifying service and for which
reason, they have not been given the pension amount to which they are entitled
to. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are
covered by a decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered in WP(C)
No. 5869/2023 vide Order dated 03.05.2024 ( Jogeswar Bujarbaruah vs. State of
Assam & 5 Ors.). He submits that this Court by taking into account the
judgment rendered by this Court in other cases i.e. WP(C) No. 1089/2015
(Sanjita Roy vs. the State of Assam & Ors.) , which was decided on 04.12.2018
and also the Judgment & Order dated 26.02.2021 passed by a Division Bench of
this Court in W.A No. 18/2021 (Binapani Das vs. the State of Assam & Ors.)
directed the respondent authorities to examine the claim of the petitioner and if
it was found that deduction of 6 years was unauthorized, the same should be
calculated as a continuous period for service for the purpose of granting pension
Page No.# 4/4
and gratuity and also other retirement benefits. The learned counsel therefore
submits that similar direction may be passed in the present case as well.
[3.] The learned counsels appearing submit that they have no objection if the
respondents are given the liberty to verify the service particulars of the
petitioners in terms of the judgment rendered to by the petitioner to see as to
whether they are entitled to pension amount which they are claiming.
[4.] Considering he submissions made by the parties, the writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5 to examine the
case of the petitioners in terms of the decision rendered in Jogeswar
Bujarbaruah (supra) and to grant them the appropriate pension as entitled to
them alongwith gratuity and other service benefits. Such exercise will be carried
out within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order.
[5.] With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
