Allowed

Jiban Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Aug 2022WP(C)/3591/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court held that withholding pension during a pending undisclosed departmental enquiry is not supported by Rule 21 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. The Court directed authorities to process and pay the petitioner's pension and other benefits within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to initiate pension proposal process and pay regular pension and other due benefits within two months.

Jiban Hazarika Vs the State of Assam and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010099982021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3591/2021

¶5

JIBAN HAZARIKA

¶6

S/O LATE GANGA RAM HAZARIKA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHARALA BARUAH CHUK, UNDER SOOTEA POLICE STATION, DIST BISWANATH ASSAM, 784175

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.

¶9

THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, CO OPERATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006

¶10

2:THE REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI 781022

¶11

3:THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KAMRUP BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI 781005

¶12

4:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI 78102

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K NAIR

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CO OP

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 03-08-2022

¶19

1. Heard Mr. A Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Co-operation Department as well as Mr. A Hasan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

¶20

2. The petitioner’s case is that he retired from service on 30.09.2019, while working as Sub-Registrar, Co-operative Societies in the office of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kamrup (M). The petitioner’s grievance is that despite nearly three years having elapsed from the date of his retirement, the petitioner has not been given his regular pension.

¶21

3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that no departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner till date and neither has any criminal case been registered against him.

¶22

4. The counsels for the respondents submit that an enquiry is going on against the petitioner, with regard to shortage of Rs. 21 lakhs, in which the petitioner could be involved. They however submit that no departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner till date, nor any criminal case has been registered against the petitioner.

¶23

5. Rule 21 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 provides that the

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

Governor of Assam can reserve to itself the right of withholding or withdrawing a pension or any part of it, whether permanently or for a specified period and the right of ordering the recovery from a pension of the whole part or part of any pecuniary loss caused to Government, if in a departmental proceeding or judicial proceeding, the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service. In the present case, no departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner till date and as there is no judicial proceeding initiated against the petitioner, the non payment of regular pension to the petitioner is not in consonance with the provisions of the said 1969 Rules.

¶26

6. Further, in the present case, there is nothing to show that the Governor of Assam has reserved to himself the right to withhold or withdraw the petitioner’s pension or any part of it. In that view of the matter, the pension payable to the petitioner would have to be paid.

¶27

7. Accordingly, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are directed to initiate the process for making the petitioner’s pension proposal and send the same to the respondent No. 4 for finalising the same and payment of regular pension within a period of 3 (three) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondent No. 4 shall thereafter finalise the petitioner’s pension within a further period of 1 (one) month. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of 2 (two) months from the date the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 receive a certified copy of this order.

¶28

8. The respondents are also directed to ensure that all other pensionery benefits that are not paid to the petitioner, is paid to him within the 2 (two) months period, stipulated above.

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

9. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Jiban Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiban Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 3 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

GS-176550L Junior ENGINEEREandM Mallesh R and Anr. Vs Bharat Khera and 3 Ors.

Dr. Putul Mahanta Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Dr. (Mrs) Ranjumoni Konwar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Anil Das Vs the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Mozibur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Shima Ahmed Vs the Union of India and 9 Ors.