Bhairab Ch Saud Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Heard Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Chakrabarty, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents; Mr. C. Borua, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General.

¶35

2] The petitioner before this Court was rendering service as a Constable under the Director General of Civil Defence and Commandant General of Home Guards. The petitioner was superannuated from on 29.04.2024 and thereafter, he has submitted all relevant documents to the Administrative Department, namely the respondent No.3 for finalization of his pension. However, in the column reserved for nominee the name of the private respondent No. 6 was sought to be entered by the petitioner, requesting the private respondent for all relevant documents and papers so that the same can be forwarded to the department for incorporation of the same and finalization of the proposal for being forwarded to the Office of the Accountant General.

¶36

3] The private respondent No. 6 namely Mrs. Manju Saud is the estranged wife of the petitioner. The petitioner and the private respondent No.6 were married subsequently the differences were occurred between them. Because of their personal differences, they started residing separately. As a consequence, thereof, the petitioner is unable to procure the relevant documents of her particulars for being forwarded to the Administrative Department for inclusion in the column of nominee in the pension proposal of the writ petitioner. He has submitted his representation before the authorities. The Commandant of the Assam Special Reserve Force Bn.I in it is communication dated 11.03.2025 addressed to the Director General of Civil Defence and Commandant General of

¶37

Page No.# 4/8

¶38

the Home Guards, Assam informed that the petitioner has not been able to submit the documents of his wife, namely the respondent No. 6, who is his nominee as per the service record and therefore, the pension proposal would not be forwarded in the online portal.

¶39

4] The respondent No. 5 has filed the affidavit and their averments are made in view of the non-supply of the documents pertaining to the respondent No. 6, who is the wife of the petitioner and shown as a nominee in the service record, therefore, the pension proposal could not be filed.

¶40

5] Although notices were issued in the matter as far back as 08.09.2025 and notices were deemed to be served on respondent No.6, the Court permitted the petitioner to undertake the service by way of Dasti. The petitioner in deference to the order of the Court attempted to serve copies by way of Dasti and in paragraph No.2 of the affidavit it is stated that although an attempt was made to serve the copies on the respondent No. 6 at her residence in presence of two witnesses, she had refused to accept the same. The names of the witnesses were shown as 1) Saritra Baishya and as No.2) Jogesh Saud. Both the witnesses appear to have signed in the notice and the notice is returned as not served and enclosed to the affidavit. Under such circumstances, by the order dated 06.05.2026, the matter was directed to proceed the ex parte against private respondent No.6.

¶41

6] The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the O.M. dated 29.04.1976 issued by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance Department. At Clause 8 paragraph (c), it is specified that provisional pension is to become final after 6 months and the provisional pension is not intended to be

¶42

Page No.# 5/8

¶43

continued on a provisional basis beyond the period of 6 months from the date of retirement. The said paragraph is extracted below:

¶44

“ (c) Provisional pension to become final after six months. The provisional pension is not intended to be continued on a provisional basis beyond a period of six months from the date of retirement. If the office responsible for issuing the pension payment order has not finalized the pension case by that time, the provisional pension shall be deemed to have become final and it will be obligatory for the office concerned to issue the final Pension Payment Order for the amount of pension and gratuity already calculated on a provisional basis, and the deduction made from the gratuity as per sub-paragraph (a) above shall also be released subject to the provisions of paragraphs 9 and 10 below.

¶45

9. Last Pay Certificate: The issue of a Last Pay Certificate should not be insisted upon before the payment of provisional pension during the period of six months after the retirement which has been provided for various purpose above, it should be possible for the Head of Office or other office concerned to issue the Last Pay Certificate to a Government servant. In cases in which the Last Pay Certificate has not been issued (Whether this hapens prior to the retirement of the Government servant as per paragraph 2(b) above, or after his retirement and after the grant of a provisional pension) the Gratuity Payment Order will in any case include a provision for withholding 10% of the gratuity or Rs. 1,000 whichever is less, pending the production of the Last Pay Certificate.

¶46

10. Adjustment of Government dues: (a) Dues pertaining to Government accommodation- This existing procedures for the issue of No Demand Certificates and the adjustment of dues pertaining to the continued occupation of Government accommodation after retirement will for the present continue. The question of the elimination of delays arising from these procedures is separately under consideration.

¶47

(b) Dues other than those pertaining to Government accomodation: In respect of other Government dues steps should be taken to ascertain or assess the outstanding dues when the processing of pension papers is taken up two years prior to the retirement date. As the next stage of the actual preparation of pension papers is reached only after a year and four months, there is ample time for ascertaining all kinds of a Government dues. One that stage is reached i.e., eight months before the retirement of the Government servant, any further probing of records for recoveries due shall cover only a limited period i.e., no more than two years before the date of retirement. It should thus be quite possible for the Head of Office, or the office which is to issue the Pension Payment Order as the case may be, to ascertain or assess all the dues, particularly those pertaining to long term advances such as house-building or conveyance advance, over-payment of pay and allowances and such other dues, prior to the prescribed deadline for the issue of the pension payment/gratuity payment orders or provisional pension/ gratuity order. The pension papers should clearly indicate the total amount of outstanding dues which should be recovered out of the death-cum-retirement gratuity before authority for the payment of gratuity (whether final or provisional) is issued, and if, after the pension papers have been transmitted to

¶48

Page No.# 6/8

¶49

the office responsible for issuing the pension payment order, additional recoveries to be made from the gratuity come to notice, the fact shall promptly reported to that office. In a case where no major recoveries are due, but 10% of the gratuity or Rs. 1,000 has been withheld because there might be unassessed Government dues, or because the gratuity has been provisionally paid as per paragraph 8 (a) above, or because Last Pay Certificate has not been received (see paragraph 9 above), the withheld amount shall automatically become payable on the expiry of six months after retirement. The Head of office (or the office issuing the pension and gratuity or the final Gratuity payment order) release the amount of gratuity withheld and add further that the withheld amount shall be released by the office disbursing the pension without further instructions on the expiry of the period of six months from the date of retirement, unless for the recovery of a specified sum or sums from the withheld amount instructions are issued within the aforesaid period”

¶50

7] The learned counsel for the respondent submits that except for furnishing of the particulars of the respondent No. 6, namely estranged wife of the petitioner, the proposal could not be finalized for being uploaded in the “Kritagyata” portal.

¶51

8] Mr. C Borua, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General also submits that once the proposal is forwarded from the Administrative Department to the Accountant General's office, the same shall be taken over and necessary orders be passed. He submits that the proposal can be forwarded even without the particulars of the respondent No. 6 in the event the department is of the view that the particulars have not been furnished by private respondent No.6 in spite of request made.

¶52

9] Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, there is no dispute that the petitioner served under the establishment of the Director General of Civil Defence and Commandant General of Home Guards and had superannuated on 29.02.2024. He therefore, is entitled to be granted pension under the Assam Services Pension Rules 1969. He satisfies the conditions specified under Rule 31 of the Pension Rules and at present, he has been granted the provisional

¶53

Page No.# 7/8

¶54

pension. But for the non furnishing of the documents by the respondent No. 6, as she is named as a nominee in the service book or the service record of the petitioner, the pension proposal could not be finalized and forwarded. As is evident from the orders passed by the Court that a direction was issued to the petitioner for impleadment of his wife, on such an application being filed by the petitioner the wife of the petitioner was impleaded as respondent No. 6.

¶55

10] It is the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of attempts being made, the respondent No. 6 has refused to accept the copies.

¶56

11] The Office Note dated 08.01.2026 reflects that although A/D Card and unserved notice has not been received in respect of respondent No.6, however, the delivery details of the consignment as available in the “India Post” website, it reflects that the item has been delivered in respect of respondent No. 6. The service by way of Dasti was directed to be effected on the private respondent No.6 by the petitioner, which the petitioner submits by filing an affidavit of compliance that attempt to serve the notice by way of Dasti was made in presence of two witnesses named in the notice appended to the said affidavit. The respondent No. 6 has refused to accept the service of the copies and/or refused to furnish any details to the petitioner for being forwarded to the Administrative Department for finalizing his pension. Under such circumstances, when there is no dispute that the petitioner was a government servant and was superannuated with effect from 29.02.2024, he satisfies the requirement under Rule 31 of the Assam Services Pension Rules and at presently he is being provided with a provisional pension, the respondent No. 3 is directed to forthwith finalize the pension proposal of the petitioner without awaiting for the particulars to be submitted in respect of the nominee i.e. respondent No. 6 and

¶57

Page No.# 8/8

¶58

upload the same in the pension portal and/or forward the same to the Office of the Accountant General, Assam. Upon such proposal being finalized and uploaded and/or forwarded to the Office of the Accountant General, the Accountant General will also without any further delay sanction the pension payable to the petitioner.

¶59

12] It is made clear that the pension payable to the petitioner must include all other retirement benefits including gratuity, which the petitioner claims has not been released. It is further directed that notwithstanding the order of this Court directing the respondents to finalize the pension proposal and forward to the Office of the Accountant General without the particulars of the nominee, namely the respondent No.6, if at any future date any such application is made by the respondent No. 6 to include as a nominee before the respondent No. 3, then necessary orders on such application should also be passed.

¶60

13] This writ petition accordingly allowed and disposed of.

¶61

JUDGE

¶62

Comparing Assistant

Bhairab Ch Saud v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhairab Ch Saud v. the State of Assam and 3 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

Bakul Nath Vs the Union of India and Othrs

Ashish Kapinjal Vs the Assam Public Service Commission and 3 Ors.

Jc- 362324 M Naib Subedar/ Clerk MD Ibomcha Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Prosen Haflongbar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Flexituff-Dird Jv Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Harmohan Chakravarty and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.