Md. Siddique Ali vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 8174 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Md. Siddique Ali vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 30 October, 2025

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010117662015




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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/3657/2015

         MD. SIDDIQUE ALI
         S/O LT. NALO ALI L.D. ASSISTANT RETIRED OFFICE OF THE SUB-
         REGISTRAR, MUKALMUA R/O VILL- LOHARKATHA P.O. LOHARKATHA,
         P.S. MUKALMUA DIST.NALBARI, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
         REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, REVENUE REGISTRATION
         AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-
         781006.

         2:FINANCE DEPARTMENT

          REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          FINANCE DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI- 781006.

         3:THE SECRETARY

          PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI- 781006.

         4:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

          ASSAM
          RUPNAGAR
          GUWAHATI- 78 1032.

         5:THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
                                                                           Page No.# 2/4


             NALBARI
             DIST. NALBARI ASSAM
             PIN - 781335.

            6:THE ACCOUNT GENERAL
            A and E
            ASSAM SECTION GE-10
             BELTOLA GUWAHATI- 781029

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR.T AHMED, S K DAS,N ALOM,MR.R ISLAM,MR.H MEDHI

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAMR1,4, and5, SC, REVENUE,SC, PENSION(R3),SC,
FINANCE(R2),SC, AG(R6)




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                        ORDER

30.10.2025

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The question before this Court is whether the writ petitioner, who was regularized vide Notification dated 25.04.2008 issued by the Department of Revenue (Annexure-6), page 39 of the writ petition along with 6 other persons including the Sub Registrar (1) Md. Hussain Ali, the petitioner is entitled to be considered and granted the same benefits as was done in the case of Md. Hussain Ali, Sub-Registrar pursuant to orders passed by this Court in WP(C)/3551/2013 order dated 22.09.2014 which was filed by Md. Hussain Ali, the then Sub Registrar.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment of the Coordinate Bench was affirmed by Division Bench of this Court and no further orders for appeal have been placed before this Court which has interfered with Page No.# 3/4

the conclusions of the Coordinate Bench. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the Government has considered the case of Md. Hussain Ali and had released his pension under the Old Pension Scheme by taking into consideration the relevant years of service rendered by Md. Hussain Ali as a Sub Registrar on commission basis.

The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that the case of the present petitioner is similarly situated and is squarely covered by the conclusions arrived at by the Coordinate Bench in WP(C) No./3551/2013 vide order dated 22.09.2014. However, the respondent authorities did not accord the same benefits to the petitioner as was done in the case of Md. Hussain Ali. The petitioner has been shown to be covered by a New Pension Scheme on the ground that he was regularised w.e.f. 25.04.2008.

Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department on the other hand objects to the submission of the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that in the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in WP(C) No. 3551/2013 [Md. Hussain Ali vs. The State of Assam and Ors.] order dated 22.09.2014, the question before the Court was whether the earlier services rendered by Md. Hussain Ali as a Sub Registrar under commission basis is to be counted towards his pensionary benefits.

Mr. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department however fairly submits that insofar as Md. Hussain Ali is concerned, the Department has considered his case and released his pension under the Old Pension Scheme. But in the present case, the writ petitioner had opted for the New Pension Scheme which is evident from an undertaking required to be given by the petitioner and which is explicitly mentioned in the notification dated 25.04.2008 Page No.# 4/4

by which the petitioner and other persons mentioned therein were brought into regular service.

It is also submitted that periodical deductions towards pension under the New Pension Scheme has been made from the salary of the writ petitioner.

On a pointed query by this Court as to whether Md. Hussain Ali, who was also brought into regular cadre by the order dated 25.04.2008, in whose favour Coordinate Bench has issued a direction for counting of earlier services rendered under as a Sub Registrar on commission basis had given similar undertaking and whether deductions towards the contribution to Pension under the New Pension Scheme was also made. The learned counsel for the respondents submit that these instructions are not available at this stage.

Mr. J. handique, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department as well as Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department will apprise this Court upon obtaining the relevant instructions and place it before this Court on the next date fixed.

List this matter on 02.12.2025.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant