Allowed

Minu Begum v. the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Jun 2022WP(C)/2099/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, a widow sought equal share in family pension and gratuity with another widow under the bank's pension regulation. The court directed the bank to process claims for both widows equally within one month while permitting deduction for unpaid loans.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Bank directed to process family pension and gratuity papers for both widows and disburse equal shares within one month, subject to adjustment for unpaid loans.

Minu Begum Vs the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010056492022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2099/2022

¶5

MINU BEGUM W/O- LATE KAMARUDDIN AHMED, R/O- VILLAGE MARUACHOWKI, P.O- MARUACHOWKI, P.S- SIPAJHAR, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784145

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1: THE ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK AND 4 ORS

¶8

REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN UZAN BAZAR, P.O- UZAN BAZAR, P.S- LATASHIL, GUWAHATI-01

¶9

2:THE GENERAL MANAGER, ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK

¶10

3:THE REGIONAL MANAGER THE ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK REGIONAL OFFICE -NALBARI PNC ROAD PIN- 781335

¶11

4:THE BRANCH MANAGER OF ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK DUMUNICHOWKI BRANCH DIST- DARRANG ASSAM

¶12

5:FASTAZA BEGUM W/O- LATE KAMARUDDIN AHMED R/O- VILLAGE MARUACHOWKI P.O- MARUACHOWKI P.S- SIPAJHAR DIST- DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78414

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, A G V B

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

– – B E F O R E

¶17

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 15-06-2022

¶20

Heard Mr. M.H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Bharali, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. M. Dey, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. M.C. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.

¶21

2. The petitioner’s grievance is that her husband expired on 03.08.2019, while serving as a Grade-IV employee in the respondent Bank at Dumunichowki Branch. Though the petitioner had submitted an application for family pension, the same has not been processed by the respondents till date. He submits that the petitioner is the second wife of the Late Kamaruddin Ahmed, while the respondent No.5 is the first wife. He submits that in terms of the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank (Employees’) Pension Regulation, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the “2018 Regulation”), the petitioner and the respondent No.5 should be given the family pension in equal shares, in terms of Regulation 38(2) and Regulation 38(6)(d)(i) of the 2018 Regulation.

¶22

3. Mr. M.C. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that he has got no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel.

¶23

4. Mr. J. Bharali, learned counsel for the respondent Bank, on the other hand, submits that there is some unpaid loan availed of by the husband of the petitioner, which would have to be adjusted from the family

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

pension and gratuity payable to the petitioner and the respondent No.5.

¶26

5. The counsels for the petitioner and the respondent No.5 submit that they have no objection if the unpaid loan amounts are adjusted from the family pension/gratuity payable to the petitioner and the respondent No.5.

¶27

6. Regulation 38(2) and Regulation 38(6)(d)(i) of the 2018 Regulation are reproduced below:-

¶28

“ 38(2) If a deceased employee or a pensioner leaves behind a widow or widower, the family pension shall become payable to the widow or widower, failing which to the eligible child or failing which, to the eligible parents.

¶29

38(6)(d)(i) Where family pension is payable to more widows than one, the family pension shall be paid to the widows in equal shares.”

¶30

7. In view of the consent of the learned counsels for the parties and keeping in view the provisions of the 2018 Regulation, the respondent Bank is directed to process the family pension papers of the petitioner and the respondent No.5 and disburse the same to them, within a period of 1(one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The Bank is however given the liberty to adjust the unpaid loan amount from the amounts to be disbursed to the petitioner and the respondent No.5. It is needless to add that the gratuity amount should be distributed equally between the petitioner and the respondent No.5. However, the respondent Bank should ensure that the petitioner and the respondent No.5 are able to get some amount of family pension/gratuity every month and the deduction should not be made so as to leave them without any amount of family pension every month.

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

J U D G E

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Minu Begum v. the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minu Begum v. the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Mainur Ali @ Mainul Ali Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Parthajit Das and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Dhanjit Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dhaneswar Deka and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Debasish Das Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Nareswar Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.