Disposed¶35

Hasiba Begum v. Syedain Abbasi and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2025Cont.Cas(C)/606/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition Cont.Cas(C)/606/2022 closed — compliance found with WP(C) No.8395/2019 order dated 30.11.2021 granting family pension to a divorced daughter dependent on her deceased mother; FPPO No.918314311664 authorized 26.02.2024 and revised FPPO 16.04.2024 to Treasury Officer, Jorhat; pension effective 30.04.2019 (date of application) per Note 3, Rule 143, Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 (Notification No.PPG(P)/10/2013/49 dated 09.08.2018); Gauhati High Court; Justice Soumitra Saikia; 08.09.2025; no order as to cost.

What did the court decide?

None — contempt proceedings closed upon finding that the directions of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 in WP(C) No.8395/2019 have been complied with; no order as to cost. ¶35

Hasiba Begum Vs Syedain Abbasi and 6 Ors. — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None — contempt proceedings closed upon finding that the directions of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 in WP(C) No.8395/2019 have been complied with; no order as to cost.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether there has been willful and deliberate disobedience of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No.8395/2019, warranting continuance of contempt proceedings. +1 more

¶27

Court's answer

Since the directions stand complied with, the Court does not wish to proceed any further with the contempt proceedings; accordingly, the Contempt Petition stands closed, with no order as to cost.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

In terms of Note-3 to amended Rule 143 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, the petitioner — admittedly initially married, latter divorced, and subsequently dependent on her late mother — is entitled to the family pension pursuant to the demise of her mother on 17.10.2018, whereafter she applied for family pension, DCRG and other retirement benefits; the family pension order now issued is effective from the date of her application (per Note 3, from the date of filing the application or the date the notification came into force, whichever is later).

¶34

Key takeaways

This Court finds that the directions contained in the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No.8395/2019 have since been complied with.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, Cont.Cas(C)/606/2022 (order dated 08.09.2025, Justice Soumitra Saikia): Hasiba Begum's contempt petition alleged willful and deliberate disobedience of the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No.8395/2019, under which she — a divorced daughter dependent on her deceased mother — was held entitled to family pension subject to the authority satisfying itself on the dependency factor. Counsel for respondents no.4, 5, 6 and 7 produced the Accountant General's authorization of Family Pension Payment Order (FPPO) No.918314311664 vide Letter no.Pr-3/PHE/2/058642/2023/5276 dated 26.02.2024 and a revised FPPO vide Letter No.PR-3/Seq No.9555/A-058642/Rev./2024/119 dated 16.04.2024 addressed to the Treasury Officer, Jorhat, the pension being applicable from 30.04.2019 (date of application) in terms of Government Notification No.PPG(P)/10/2013/49 dated 09.08.2018. The Court held that, by Note 3 inserted in amended Rule 143 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, the petitioner is entitled to family pension pursuant to her mother's demise on 17.10.2018, payable from the date of her application; finding the 2021 directions complied with, it declined to proceed further and closed the contempt petition with no order as to cost.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010222982022

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/606/2022

¶6

HASIBA BEGUM

¶7

D/O. LT. MAHMUDA BEGUM AND LT. MAHMUD HUSSAIN, VILL. POTIA GAON (AMGURI GHAT), P.O. MELAMATI, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN785632.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SYEDAIN ABBASI AND 6 ORS THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

¶10

2:DIPTENDU TALUKDAR

¶11

THE CHIEF ENGINEER OF PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPTT. ASSAM HENGERABARI GUWAHATI-36.

¶12

3:BHASKAR SARMA

¶13

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JORHAT PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DIVISION P.O. AND DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN-785001.

¶14

4:GULJARI LAL

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM MAIDAMGAON

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

BELTOLA GUWAHATI-29. 5:PRITHWISH KUMAR CHAKI

¶18

THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 6:SAMIR SINHA

¶19

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 7:SHRI K.S. GOPINATH NARAYAN THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI-29

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H SAIKIA, MR. B BORAH,MR. K KALITA,R K HAJONG

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R R Gogoi,

¶22

BEFORE

¶23

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶24

ORDER

¶25

08.09.2025

¶26

Heard Mr. IH Saikia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. RK Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents no.4 & 7 and learned counsel for the respondents no. 5 & 6.

¶27

2] This contempt petition is filed alleging willful and deliberate disobedience of

¶28

Page No.# 3/4

¶29

the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No.8395/2019, whereby the petitioner who was a divorced daughter and was dependent on her deceased mother was held to be entitled to the family pension subject to the condition that the authority may be satisfied on the dependency factor by incorporating additional queries, as may deem fit and proper.

¶30

3] Mr. RK Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents no.4 & 7 has filed an affidavit to submit that the Office of the Accountant General has authorized the Family Pension Payment Order(FPPO) bearing No.918314311664 vide Letter no.Pr-3/PHE/2/058642/2023/5276 dated 26.02.2024 and subsequently revised FPPO authority vide Letter No.PR-3/Seq No.9555/A-058642/Rev./2024/119 dated 16.04.2024 which was addressed to the Treasury Officer, Jorhat to make necessary payment. A copy of the same was also sent to the petitioner in her residential address. According to the respondents, the pension is applicable to her with effect from 30.04.2019 i.e. from the date of application in terms of the Government Notification No.PPG(P)/10/2013/49 dated 09.08.2018.

¶31

4] Learned counsel for the respondents has placed before the Court a Notification dated 09.08.2018 to submit that by this Notification the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 stood amended and Rule 143 was amended and after Note-1, Note- 2 to 5 were inserted. For the purpose of the present proceedings Note 3 is relevant and therefore, the same is extracted below:

¶32

“ Note 3: If at the time of submission of family pension claim, there are no minor children in the family, the family pension shall be paid from the date of filing application by the claimant or from the date of coming into force of this notification whichever is later. No claim for arrear benefit under this clause shall be entertained. Otherwise, the family pension shall be paid from the date following the date of death of the widow/widower as the case may be.”

¶33

Page No.# 4/4

¶34

5] Perusal of the Notification dated 09.08.2018 reveals that Rule 143 stood amended with effect from 09.08.2018 and Note 3 prescribes the payment of family pension from the date of filing the application by the claimant or from the date of coming into force of this notification whichever is later. This requirement is subject to the fact that there are no minor children in the family. Admittedly, in the present proceedings, the petitioner was initially married and latter divorced and subsequently, was dependent on her late mother. Therefore, in terms of Note-3, the petitioner is entitled to the family pension pursuant to the demise of her mother on 17.10.2018, whereafter she applied for the family pension, DCRG, and other retirement benefits. The same has now been considered through the issuance of the family pension order, effective from the date of her application for the release of the family pension.

¶35

6] Under such circumstances, this Court finds that the directions contained in the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No.8395/2019 have since been complied with, therefore, the Court at this stage does not wish to proceed any further with the contempt proceedings. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition stands closed. No order as to cost.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Hasiba Begum v. Syedain Abbasi and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasiba Begum v. Syedain Abbasi and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Singh Vs Mamata Hojai and 2 Ors.

East India Supply Centre Vs Dilip Kumar Borah, IAS and Ors.

Iunush Ali and 19 Ors. Vs Preetom Saikia and 3 Ors..

Hd Lalnunzira and 9 Ors. Vs Sh Khilli Ram Meena and 4 Ors.

Dr. Pradip Bhattacharjee Vs Samir Kumar Sinha and Anr.

Nilambar Das Vs Kailash Karthik N, IAS

Golak Ch Baishya Vs Anamika Tamuli

Syed Asadullah Dewan and 2 Ors. Vs Mohon Chandra Boro and 2 Ors.

Sova Hi-Tech Industries and 4 Ors. Vs The State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Sisi Welly Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Tani Jonkey Vs The State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Ratna Deep Das and 6 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 11 Ors.

All Assam Gaon Panchayat Secretary Association and Ors. Vs Dr Ravi Kota and Ors.