Allowed

Smt. Rita Das v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Sept 2022WP(C)/4926/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State to release family pension and retirement benefits to the petitioner, who was the first wife of a deceased employee, based on a settlement agreement between the petitioners and the second wife to distribute benefits equally. The court ordered the benefits to be paid to the petitioner within one month, who must then share half with the other wife.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 1 to 4 directed to release family pension and all other retirement benefits to the petitioner within one month, to be distributed in equal shares between the petitioner and respondent No.

Smt. Rita Das Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010147832022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4926/2022

¶5

SMT. RITA DAS W/O- DINABANDHU DAS, RESIDENT OF BANKONWAR NAGAR, JAHAJGHAT, KHARGULI, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP(M), ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI.

¶8

2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUWAHATI-2 AAYAKAR BHAWAN SECOND FLOOR CHRISTIANBASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM- 785001.

¶9

3:THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUWAHATI-2 AAYAKAR BHAWAN SECOND FLOOR CHRISTIANBASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM- 785001.

¶10

4:THE INCOME TAX OFFICER ( HQ AND TPS)

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUWAHATI-2 AAYAKAR BHAWAN SECOND FLOOR CHRISTIANBASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM- 785001. 5:SMT. BASANTI DAS W/O- LATE DINABANDHU DAS SONPUR WARD NO. 9 NALBARI DISTRICT- NALBARI ASSAM-781335

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M CHOUDHURY

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 12-09-2022

¶18

Heard Mr. M Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A Gayan, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. N Rai, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.

¶19

The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 had both married the Late Dinabandhu Das. The petitioner and the respondent No. 5, both have 3 (three) children each from the Late Dinabandhu Das. The Late Dinabandhu Das expired on 20.09.2004. The petitioner and the respondent No. 5 thereafter prayed for grant of family pension and other retiral benefits. However, the same was not been paid in view of the dispute between

¶20

Page No.# 3/4

¶21

the petitioner and the respondent No. 5, with respect to their claims for the retirement benefits of the Late Dinabandhu Das. He also submits that though WP(C) No. 8129/2005 had earlier been filed by the petitioner, the same was withdrawn vide order dated 25.07.2007.

¶22

The counsels for the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 submit that the parties have come to a settlement and that the respondent No. 5 does not have any objection to the grant of family pension and other retirement benefits in favour of the petitioner. He also submits that though the said settlement has been made between the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 since 2007, the State respondents have till date not disbursed the retirement benefits of the Late Dinabandhu Das to the petitioner.

¶23

The counsels for the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 submit that as per the settlement made between the petitioner and the respondent No. 5, the pension and other retirement benefits that would be released to the petitioner, would thereafter be distributed between the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 in equal shares.

¶24

Ms. A Gayan, learned CGC submits that in terms of the agreement made between the parties, the State respondents shall release the family pension and other retirement benefits to the petitioner. The petitioner should thereafter distribute half the benefits to the respondent No. 5.

¶25

On perusal of the writ petition, this Court finds that in terms of Annexure-1 of the writ petition, the petitioner got married to the Late Dinabandhu Das on 20.04.1980, while the respondent No. 5 got married to the Late Dinabandhu Das in terms of Annexure-2 on 27.09.1983.

¶26

On considering the joint representation dated 12.06.2006 made by the

¶27

Page No.# 4/4

¶28

petitioner and the respondent No. 5, the deed of Agreement dated 18.02.2010, the letter F. No. P-230/PCIT/GHY/2021-22/4459-60 dated 13.01.2022 issued by the Income Tax Officer (HQ&TPS), office of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Guwahati and the oral submissions made by the counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that the State respondents should disburse the retirement benefits to the petitioner. Accordingly, the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are directed to release the family pension and all other retirement benefits of the Late Dinabandhu Das to the petitioner within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Thereafter, the petitioner shall distribute half the benefits received by her to the respondent No. 5.

¶29

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Smt. Rita Das v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rita Das v. the Union of India 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

Sarbeswar Lahkar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Narayan Kumar Nath Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rijumoni Kataki Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Subrata Biswas Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Md. Abul Kashem Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Rabhijeet Saikia Vs Managing Director of Idbi Bank and 9 Ors.