Dismissed

Nasir Uddin Sarkar v. Samir Sinha, IAS and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Jun 2022Cont.Cas(C)/177/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition, the petitioner claimed non-compliance with a previous order regarding the payment of his provisional pension. The Court examined documents showing the petitioner received a regular pension and had previously deposited an amount towards overdraft. Finding no violation, the Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed; personal appearance of Respondent No. 5 exempted; prior contempt notices recalled.

Nasir Uddin Sarkar Vs Samir Sinha, IAS and 4… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010061462020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/177/2020

¶5

NASIR UDDIN SARKAR

¶6

S/O. LT. AINUDDIN SARKAR, VILL. BHAMUNDANGA PT-III, P.O. KHERBARI, P.S. AGOMANI, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783335.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SAMIR SINHA, IAS AND 4 ORS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FINANCE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

¶9

2:PRITHWISH KR. CHAKI

¶10

DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

¶11

3:DIPAK KUMAR SARMA DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER (DEEO) DHUBRI P.O. AND P.S. DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783301.

¶12

4:DEWAN ABIDUR RAHMAN DY. INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS DHUBRI P.O. DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

PIN-783301.

¶15

5:AMINUL HOQUE TREASURY OFFICER DHUBRI TREASURY P.O. DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783301.

¶16

6:MR SUBHASH CHANDRA DAS DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-0

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : MR J ABEDIN

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶20

ORDER

¶21

15.06.2022

¶22

Heard Mr. M R Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S M T Chistie, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 3. Also heard Mr. J Abedin, learned counsel for the respondent No.4; Mr. A Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and Mr. B Deuri, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6.

¶23

Matter pertains to alleged willful disobedience and non-compliance by the respondents in respect of the order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the Court in WP(C) No. 7181/2019.

¶24

Pursuant to the order dated 09.06.2022, Aminul Haque, the then Treasury Officer, Dhubri is personally present before the Court.

¶25

The petitioner is aggrieved since 01.06.2019 he has not been paid his provisional pension.

¶26

Page No.# 3/5

¶27

In this Contempt Petition filed on 11.03.2020, the petitioner at Paragraph 3 admitted the fact of receipt of the letter/communication of the Director of Pension, Assam under No. Pen:ADP/PPO/GPO/2011-12/055337 dated 29.04.2019 issued to the Treasury Officer, Dhubri towards regularization/finalization of the monthly pension of the petitioner.

¶28

Petitioner contended that after receipt of the said letter of the Director of Pension, Assam dated 29.04.2019, neither the Treasury Officer, Dhubri nor the Deputy Inspector of School, Dhubri took any step for regularization/ finalization of the monthly pension of the petitioner, rather mis-construed/ misunderstood the said letter dated 29.04.2019 and further made a fresh calculation reducing his scale of pay (basic pension) and came to the conclusion that he had overdrawn an amount of Rs. 2,91,049/- which was illegal and without any authority of law.

¶29

It is also submitted by the petitioner that the Treasury Officer, Dhubri as well as the Deputy Inspector of School, Dhubri created pressure on him towards recovery of the said amount without issuing any order in that regard and stopped his provisional pension, till filing of the Contempt Petition.

¶30

Petitioner did not annex the said communication/letter of the Director of Pension, Assam dated 29.04.2019 in this Contempt Petition.

¶31

However, copy of the said letter dated 29.04.2019 of the Director of Pension; Assam has been found available along with the order sheet of this petition.

¶32

From the same it is seen that the said communication issued by the Director of Pension, Assam Pension on 29.04.2019 is the final Pension Pay Order (PPO) of the petitioner, wherein the monthly pension of the petitioner has been assessed at Rs. 3,880/- per month w.e.f. 01.08.2011 to 31.03.2016 and at Rs. 9,630/- per month from 01.04.2016 onwards.

¶33

By the said communication dated 29.04.2019, the Director of Pension, Assam directed the Treasury Officer, Dhubri that the petitioner’s portion of the order may be made over to him after obtaining his signature on the disburser’s portion on his satisfaction regarding the identity of the said pensioner.

¶34

Further, the said Pension Pay Order dated 29.04.2019 specified that if the

¶35

Page No.# 4/5

¶36

petitioner/pensioner wishes to draw his pension though an authorized agent, his portion of the pension pay order may on application by the pensioner be sent to the authorized agent through registered post provided the latter has executed a bond of indemnity to refund overpayments with a written acknowledgment of the receipt of pensioner’s portion of the payment order to be obtained from the pensioner though the agent for record.

¶37

In the said PPO dated 29.04.2019 issued by the Director of Pension, Assam it was further mentioned that a certificate from the pensioner’s Drawn and Disbursement Officer to the effect of drawl/non-drawl of provisional pension/family pension/DCRG duly countersigned by respective Treasury Officer may be obtained and the amount shown therein, if any, may be recovered from first payment.

¶38

It is also seen that copy of the said PPO dated 29.04.2019 was forwarded to the petitioner in his present address as well as to the Deputy Inspector of School, Dhubri for information with reference to his letter No. 3495 dated 29.09.2018.

¶39

It is seen that the said Pension Pay Order dated 29.04.2019 issued in favour of the petitioner does not contain any such order and/or calculation for recovery of any access amount drawn by the petitioner and have further seen that the petitioner is regularly receiving his regular pension.

¶40

When regular pension is received by a pensioner, question of payment of provisional pension to the same pensioner does not arise.

¶41

Further, from the documents placed by the respondent No. 6 i.e. the Director of Pension through Mr. B Deuri, learned counsel, it is seen that the petitioner himself had deposited an amount of Rs. 37,961/- on 07.09.2018 with the concerned treasury that he had overdrawn during his service tenure, in pursuance of the letter No. DP:ADP/201112/2012/03/0438 dated 28.08.2018 of the Finance and Accounts Officer in the Directorate of Pension as per the assessment made by the Deputy Inspector of School, Dhubri pursuant to the said letter of the Finance and Accounts Officer, which fact have not been mentioned by the petitioner in this Contempt Petition.

¶42

Considering all these above, the Court found that the respondents have already issued necessary order paying the regular pension to the petitioner and have not violated and/or committed willful violence of the order of the Court dated 23.09.2019 passed in

¶43

Page No.# 5/5

¶44

WP(C) No. 7181/2019.

¶45

Accordingly, this Contempt Petition, being devoid of any merit stands dismissed. Personal appearance of Aminul Haque, the then Treasury Officer, Dhubri is hereby exempted.

¶46

The Notice of Contempt issued upon the respondents earlier on 13.03.2020 and 29.10.2021 are hereby recalled.

¶47

JUDGE

¶48

Comparing Assistant

Nasir Uddin Sarkar v. Samir Sinha, IAS and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasir Uddin Sarkar v. Samir Sinha, IAS and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Washim Akram Vs Kumar Sanjay Krishna, IAS and 3 Ors.

Biswajit Dey and Anr. Vs Pritom Saikia, IAS and Anr.

Mohidhar Bhuyan and Ors. Vs T.Y Das and Ors.

Mitali Barbara Vs Dr. Kamala Kanta Nath, Iss and 2 Ors.

Karunamay Bhattacharyya Vs Preetam Saikia, IAS and 2 Ors.

Jogen Sinha Vs Barnali Sharma and Anr.

Dinabandhu Nayak and Anr. Vs Prasanta Borkakati

Md. Nekibuddin Ahmed Vs Abhijit Baruah and Anr.

Suporna Singha Choudhury Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Amlanjyoti Phukan Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Aklas Uddin Mazarbhuiyan Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bichitra Rava Vs Keshab Mazumdar and 5 Ors.

Rabindra Bhattacharjee Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.