Dismissed

Nikhil Das v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Oct 2019WP(C)/7430/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dispensed with the need for a formal notice while deciding a writ petition concerning a retired worker denied full pension benefits. The court held that a six-year deduction from service was impermissible per prior precedent, entitling the petitioner to pension from the date of the earlier ruling.

What did the court decide?

Direction to calculate and release pensionary benefits within three months from the order date; benefits granted from 4.12.2018.

Nikhil Das Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010238002019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 7430/2019

¶5

1:NIKHIL DAS

¶6

S/O- LT HONU DAS, R/O- VILL- PURAN BAKURPARA, P.O. GOALPARA, P.S. GOALPARA,, DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM, PIN- 783101

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

¶9

2:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6

¶10

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. CHANDMARI GHY-03

¶11

4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GHY-29

¶12

5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GOALPARA WATER RESOURCES DIVISION GOALPARA DIST- GOALPARA (ASSAM)

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

PIN- 783101

¶15

6:THE TREASURY OFFICER GOALPARA TREASURY GOALPARA DIST- GOALPARA (ASSAM) PIN- 78310

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WATER RESOURCE

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 01-10-2019

¶21

Heard Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General(A & E), Mr. D. Nath, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the respondent nos. 1,3,5 and 6 and Mr. P. Nayak , learned Standing Counsel Finance Department for respondent No.6.

¶22

The petitioner was serving as a Muster Roll worker under the Executive Engineer, Goalpara Water Resources Division, Goalpara, Assam since 1.3.1993. Thereafter his post was regularized w.e.f. 22.7.2005 and was allowed regular scale of pay. After rendering his continuous service he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.8.2018. The office of the Accountant General(A&E), Assam sanctioned only terminal gratuity of Rs 2,42,621/-. But the other benefits like monthly superannuation pension and death cum retirement gratuity (DCRG) were not sanctioned on the ground that the petitioner had not completed 20 years of net qualifying service.

¶23

Considering the nature of this case this court is of the view that the present petition can be disposed of at the stage without issuing any formal notice to the respondents. The petitioner from the date of his joining rendered 25 years 6 months qualifying service but the six years of initial engagement was deducted on the basis of the office memorandum dated 20.5.2005 and resulting service of the petitioner is taken to be 19 years 6 months. Accordingly the office of the Accountant General, Assam only sanctioned the terminal gratuity.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

But impliedly refused to sanction the superannuation pension only on the ground that the 20 years service is not completed by the petitioner.

¶26

In WP(C) 1089/2015 decided on 4.12.2018 it was held that the said deduction of six years as impermissible by this court. The legal position is not controverted by the learned counsel for the respondent authority. For the said reason, I am of the opinion that the petitioner would be entitled to the pensionary benefits as the petitioner has more than 20 years of service in his credit from the date of appointment.

¶27

Accordingly this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to calculate the pensionary benefits of the petitioner and release the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is further clarified that the pensionary benefit will be granted from the date of order dated 4.12.2018 as have been done in other similar cases. Any terminal benefits if granted to the petitioner the same may be adjusted at the finalization of the pension.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Nikhil Das v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikhil Das v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pompi Goswami Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Md. Tafazul Haque Vs Md. Badrul Islam and 6 Ors.

Samsul Haque Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Anjana Borah and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Upen Phukan @ Upen Ch. Phukan Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Narahari Ojha Vs Assam Power Distribution Co. Ltd. and 4 Ors.