[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/6 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 21 January, 2026
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010286192025
2026:GAU-AS:723
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/154/2026
BISMITA SAIKIA
D/O- LATE TRIDIP SAIKIA, R/O COTTON ROAD, HAZARIKA CHOWK,
TEZPUR- 784001, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,
GUWAHATI- 781006
2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI- 781007
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
SONITPUR
TEZPUR
DIST.- SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 784001
4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
ASSAM
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI- 78102
Page No.# 2/6
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
For the petitioner (s) : Ms. S. Chanda, Advocate
For the respondent (s) : Mr. D. Borah, Advocate
Mr. C. Baruah, Advocate
Date on which judgment is reserved : NA
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 21.01.2026
Whether the pronouncement is of the
Operative part of the judgment? : NA
Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced? : Yes
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Ms. S. Chanda, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner. Mr. D. Borah, the learned counsel
appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. C.
Baruah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent
No.4.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of
Respondent Authorities in disbursing the family pension to the
petitioner who claims to be a divorced dependent daughter of
one Tridip Saikia (since deceased).
3. The brief facts of the case as would be apparent from the
materials on record is that the petitioner's father Late Tridip
Page No.# 3/6
Saikia retired from the establishment of respondent No.3 on
28.02.2002 upon attaining the age of superannuation. After
retirement, Late Tridip Saikia was paid pension vide PPO
No.TEZ/73109. The petitioner got married to one Pranjal Dutta
on 18.01.2009, but the said marriage was dissolved by the
judgment and decree dated 15.09.2014 passed by the learned
Principal Judge, Family Court No.1 Kamrup, Guwahati in F.C.
(Civil) No.136/2010, whereby a decree of divorce was granted in
favour of the husband of the petitioner. An Appeal thereagainst
was preferred being Mat. Appeal No.12/2015 by the petitioner.
However, the said Appeal was dismissed vide the judgment and
order dated 24.06.2015 thereby confirming the judgment dated
15.09.2014 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court
No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati in F.C. (Civil) No.136/2010.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that upon the
dissolution of the marriage, the petitioner started residing with
her parents. The mother of the petitioner predeceased her father
Late Tridip Saikia who expired on 04.04.2022. Thereupon, the
petitioner, being the dependent divorced daughter of Late Tridip
Saikia had applied for family pension. However, the Respondent
Authorities have not considered the request of the petitioner, and
it is under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached
this Court.
Page No.# 4/6
5. Ms. S. Chanda, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submitted that along with the petitioner, there is
another sibling, i.e. her sister who is presently married, and
under such circumstances, the petitioner, being the divorced
dependent daughter of Late Tridip Saikia has the sole entitlement
to the family pension.
6. This Court has duly taken note of that the petitioner has
also submitted a representation, which, however, has not been
considered till date.
7. This Court has also heard the learned counsels appearing on
behalf of the respondents who fairly submitted that a divorced
dependent daughter would be entitled to the family pension
subject to a declaration being submitted by the petitioner that
she was the dependent divorced daughter of Late Tridip Saikia
during his lifetime. The learned counsel for the respondents
further submitted that the learned Coordinate Benches of this
Court have passed certain directions in respect to similar issues.
The following directions in the case of Dipshikha Biswas vs. the
State of Assam & Others in WP(C) No.7077/2025 being relevant is
reproduced herein below:-
"8. This Court, a co-ordinate Bench upon considering the matter in
its entirety held as under:
Page No.# 5/6
i. This Court is of the view that since the intention of the
Legislature is to support a dependent daughter who is
unmarried and the emphasis is on the dependency of such
daughter upon the deceased Government Servant, the same
benefit may be extended to a divorced dependent daughter.
This Court is of the view that there will not be a major
difference between an unmarried or a divorced daughter as
the pivotal ground is the ground of dependency. This Court
has also noticed that being an unmarried daughter, per se
shall not make such a daughter eligible for the family pension
and it would be incumbent upon such unmarried daughter to
establish her dependency on the deceased Government
Servant, juxtaposition a divorced daughter, such obligation
would still remain and may be perhaps with some additional
conditions connected to receipt of alimony etc. which has been
indicated above. In the instant case, This Court has also
noticed that the divorce was on 24.09.2014 and the Scheme
had undergone the amendment on 14.09.2017 and the death
of the mother was on 17.10.2018. Therefore, there is no
manner of doubt regarding the applicability of the amended
Scheme in the context of the various dates of the present
case.
ii. This Court is also guided by the observations of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court while dismissing the SLP filed by the Union of
India in the case of Khajani Devi (Supra) which records that
the order recognizing the right of the divorcee dependent
Page No.# 6/6
daughter to receive the benefit adopts a progressive and
socially constructive approach to a daughter who was divorced
treating her at parity with the unmarried daughter.
iii. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the
petitioner, who is a divorced daughter and was dependent on
her deceased mother is entitled to the family pension subject
to the condition that the authorities may be satisfied on the
dependency factor by incorporating additional queries, as may
deem fit and appropriate."
8. It is the opinion of this court that the petitioner herein being
similarly situated would also be entitled to similar reliefs subject
to the necessary verifications.
9. Accordingly, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ
petition thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to consider
the case of the petitioner for grant of family pension in view of
the expiry of her father, Late Tridip Saikia, who expired on
04.04.2022 by making necessary verification into the dependency
factor. The said exercise be completed within a period of three
months from the date a certified copy of this order along with
the declaration as regards the dependency is submitted by the
petitioner to the respondent No.3.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
