Gauhati High Court
Khairun Nessa @ Khairun Bewa vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 7 March, 2025
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010203862024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5305/2024
KHAIRUN NESSA @ KHAIRUN BEWA
W/O- LATE MAHAMMAD ALI, VILLAGE- CHAKARAGAON, PO- DALGAON,
DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784116
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,
GUWAHATI-6
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
4:THE COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSAM
JUTIPAR
SIX MILE
GUWAHATI-37
5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/5
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
GUWAHATI-6
6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ZILLA PARISHAD
DARRANG
AT MANGALDAI
P.O. MANGALDAI
DISTRICT- DARRANG
ASSAM
PIN- 784125
7:THE TREASURY OFFICER
DARRANG TREASURY
AT MANGALDAI
PO- MANGALDAI
DISTRICT- DARRANG
ASSAM
PIN- 78412
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ISLAM, MS A KHATUN
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P AND R.D.,SC, FINANCE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 07.03.2025
Heard Mr. M Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S
Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD.
2. The petitioner before this Court is the widow of late Mahammad Ali.
The husband of the petitioner was serving as a Tax Collector at Dalgaon Gaon
Panchayat under Darrang Zilla Parishad on temporary basis vide order dated
02.12.sic... and accordingly, he joined in his service. Thereafter his post was
regularized vide order dated 16.11.1991 issued by the Chief Executive Officer,
Darrang Zilla Parisad, Mangaldoi and he received his regular scale of pay.
Page No.# 3/5
Subsequently, his post was Provincialised vide order dated 02.10.1999 issued by
the Directorate of Panchayat and Rural Development, Assam. During the course
of his service, the husband of the petitioner expired on 13.04.1999 leaving
behind his two wives viz. Jaigan Begum and the petitioner and 7(seven) Nos. of
children. Pursuant to the demise of the husband of the petitioner, she had been
approaching the respondent authorities for release of the family pension
benefits.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the family
pension papers were duly submitted to the respondent no.6 namely, The Chief
Executive Officer, Darrang Zilla Parisad for being forwarded to the office of the
respondent no.4, namely, The Commissioner, Panchayat & Rural Development
Department. However, the family pension benefits as well as death benefits
have not yet been released in spite of approaching the respondent authorities
on several times.
4. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard. The counsel at
the Bar are in agreement that the entitlement of pensionary benefits to Tax
Collectors have been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in WA 145/2009
(the State of Assam vs. Syed Md. Fazlay Rabbi) vide judgment and order dated
24.03.2010. That apart, by order dated 28.03.2018 issued by the Panchayat and
Rural Development in respect of entitlement of pensionary benefits to the Tax
Collectors have been interfered with by another Division Bench of this Court
rendered in WA No. 133/2023 vide Judgment and order dated 05.08.2023. The
Division Bench upheld the impugned judgment and order dated 05.08.2022
passed by a co-ordinate Bench in WP(C) No.4397/22. The Division Bench in its
judgment held that in view of the communication dated 30.05.2003 issued by
the Government that employees of the Panchayat Raj Institute will be treated as
Page No.# 4/5
regular employees of the Panchayat Raj Institution. The subsequent
communications or orders passed by the Government holding that the benefit of
regularisation will be with prospective effect from the date they have joined in
the post created ex-post facto for giving them the benefit of regular service.
Consequently, the Division Bench held that those employees who were given
regular benefits by creation of ex-post-facto cannot be treated as "new
entrants" joining the State Government services subsequently after introduction
of new pension scheme. They have to be treated as employees who had joined
as Government employees under the old pension scheme. It was held by the
Division Bench that such employees could not be brought under the new
pension scheme.
5. The judgment and order dated 24.03.2010 passed in W.A.
No.145/2009; the judgment dated 05.08.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 4397/2022
and the judgment and order dated 05.08.2023 passed in W.A. No.133/2023
have been carefully perused.
6. Having perused those judgments, it is found that the issue involved
in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the said judgments
rendered in W.A. No 145/2009 on 24.03.2010 and WA No.133/2023 on
05.08.2023.
7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands allowed. The
respondents are directed to immediately process the pension papers of the late
husband of the petitioner and take necessary steps so that the pensionary
benefits including family pension can be granted to the petitioner as
expeditiously as possible within the outer limit of 90 (ninety) days from the
receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Page No.# 5/5
8. The petitioner will furnish a certified copy of this order before the
respondent no.1 who in turn will issue necessary directions to the concerned
respondents/officials to prepare the pension papers of the late husband of the
petitioner and forward the same to the Director of Pension, Assam within a
period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this
order. The Pension Department will thereafter take necessary steps for release
of the pension of the petitioner's husband within outer limit of 60 (sixty) days
thereafter.
9. The petitioner shall furnish all the necessary particulars to the
respondents required for processing the family pension of the petitioner.
10. Writ petition stands allowed and disposed of in terms of the above.
11. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
12. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, are closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
