Disposed

Nurul Nahar Begum v. the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC11 Dec 2023WP(C)/7627/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, claiming to be the widow of a retired bank employee, filed a writ petition against the bank for the release of family pension, citing another woman also claiming widow status. The court directed the bank authorities to examine both claims and pass an appropriate order in terms of the bank's pension regulation after giving both parties an opportunity to be heard. The writ petition w

What did the court decide?

Directed the bank to examine the inter se claims of the petitioner and respondent no.6 under the pension regulations and pass an appropriate order within 30 days after giving them an opportunity to be

Nurul Nahar Begum Vs the Assam Gramin Vikash… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010236652022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/7627/2022

¶5

NURUL NAHAR BEGUM

¶6

W/O- LT. KABIR AHMED MAZUMDER, VILL- LALANG PART-I, P.O. PAILAPOOL, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK AND 4 ORS REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN (A JOINT UNDERTAKING OF THE GOVT. OF INDIA, GOVT. OF ASSAM AND PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) H.O., GS ROAD, BHANGAGARH, GHY, PIN- 781005

¶9

2:THE GENERAL MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION) ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK H.O. GS ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY PIN- 781005

¶10

3:THE CHIEF MANAGER (PERSONNEL) ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK H.O. GS ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY PIN- 781005 4:THE REGIONAL MANAGER SILCHAR REGION ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

REGIONAL OFFICE SILCHAR AMBICAPATTY P.O. SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR PIN- 788004 5:THE BRANCH MANAGER PAILAPOOL BRANCH OF ASSAM GRAMIN VIKASH BANK RAJABAZAR-HARINAGAR-KUMACHARA ROAD PAILAPOOL DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788098 6:LAYLUN NEHAR BARBHUIYA W/O LATE KABIR AHMED MAZUMDER VILLAGE UJANGRAM PO BARJATRAPUR DISTRICT CACGAR ASSAM PIN-78811

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M S MAZUMDER

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, A G V B

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

11.12.2023

¶19

Heard Mr. A.M.S. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard

¶20

Ms. Mochahari, learned Standing Counsel, AGVB and Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the respondent no.6.

¶21

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner claiming to be the wife of late Kabir Ahmed Muzumder who was working as a Branch Manager in the Assam

¶22

Page No.# 3/5

¶23

Gramin Vikash Bank.

¶24

The petitioner’s husband superannuated on 31.12.2019 and after his retirement he received his pension and other pensionary benefits. The petitioner’s husband expired on 26.03.2021. The petitioner claims to be the surviving widow of late Kabir Ahmed Muzumder and had approached the authorities for release of family pension. However, her prayers have not been attended to by the Bank authorities. Meanwhile, the respondent no.6, namely, Laylun Nehar Barbuiya, who is impleaded in the writ petition as the respondent no.6 by virtue of the order passed by this court on 12.06.2023 in IA (C) No.1392/2023, also claims to be the widow of late Kabir Ahmed Muzumder.

¶25

Although this Court had granted opportunities earlier, the learned counsel for the respondents/Bank prays for further time for completing her instructions and filing necessary affidavit.

¶26

Having heard and counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the pleadings on record, this Court finds that the only issue in the present writ petition is that the claims of the petitioner vis a vis the private respondent no.6 for the family pension, as both of them claim to be widows of late Kabir Ahmed Muzumder.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the Assam Gramin

¶28

Page No.# 4/5

¶29

Vikash Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 2018, more particularly, Regulation no.38 (6) (d) (i). As per Regulation no.38 (6) (d)(i) – “where family pension is payable to more widows than one, the family pension shall be paid to widows in equal shares.”

¶30

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the authorities are required to make a decision in terms of the Regulation and pass appropriate orders entertaining the claims of the petitioner vis a vis the claim of the private respondent no.6.

¶31

Such submissions made are not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the private respondent no.6.

¶32

Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that since the prayer in the writ petition is restricted only to the share of family pension payable to the petitioner vis a vis the claims of private respondent no.6, as both of them claim to be widows of late Kabir Ahmed Muzumder, this Court is of the considered view that the matter can be disposed of at this stage with the direction to the respondent Bank, namely, the respondents no.1, 2 & 3, who will look into the grievances raised by the petitioner as well as the respondent no.6, and thereafter pass appropriate orders in terms of Regulation as per the provisions of the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations,

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

The authorities while deciding the inter se claims will take into account the provisions of Regulation 38 of the Regulations and pass appropriate orders. While deciding the matter, the Bank authorities will permit sufficient opportunities to both the petitioner and the respondent no.6 to agitate their inter se claims. Any such speaking order that is passed by the respondent authorities, copies thereof shall be served on the petitioner and the respondent no.6.

¶35

The respondent no.6 are permitted to approach the respondent authorities, namely, the respondents no., 1, 2 & 3 to decide the matter in terms of the directions passed by this Court within a period of 1 (one) week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. And thereafter, the authorities will decide the matter in terms of the directions issued within a further period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with any representation or application as filed by the petitioner and/or the respondent no.6.

¶36

In terms of the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Nurul Nahar Begum v. the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nurul Nahar 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

Namita Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Nupur Chakrabarty Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Debasis Das Vs United Bank of India and 5 Ors.

Rajendra Nath Sarma Vs Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited and 4 Ors.

Junu Gogoi @ Junu Konwar Gogoi Vs Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited and 4 Ors.

Hafizul Rahman and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.