Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010089522025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2343/2025 RABIA BEGUM W/O- LATE HAZRAT ALI AHMED, VILL AND PO- KADAMTOLA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM 781311 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT DISPUR, GHY- 6 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCE DEPTT ASSAM GUWAHATI 6 3:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR SIXMILE GUWAHATI 37 4:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 5:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPET ZILLA PARISHAD BARPETA PO AND DIST BARPETA ASSAM PIN 781301 6:THE TREASURY OFFICER BARPETA TREASURY BARPETA PO AND DIST BARPETA ASSAM PIN 78130 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ISLAM, MS A KHATUN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., GA, ASSAM,SC, FINANCE DEPTT. Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 05.05.2025 Heard Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Konwar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam for the P&RD and Ms. S Boruah, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam. 2. The prayer in this writ petition is for grant of full pension and other retiral benefits by considering the total length of service reckoned from the date of initial appointment of the petitioner's husband in the service of the Panchayat. 3. The petitioner's husband, namely, Lt. Hazrat Ali Ahmed, on reaching the age of superannuation retired from service on 31.01.2004 as a Secretary of Kadamtola GAon Panchayat under the Zilla Parishad, Barpeta, the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Government of Assam. The petitioner's husband was appointed in the service of the Gaon Panchayat on 03.10.1963. During the tenure of her husband’s service, the State Government had enacted the Assam Panchayat Employees [Provincialisation] Act, 1999 ['the Act, for short] and as per the provisions of the Act, the provincialised panchayat employees are to be provided pension and other retirement dues in terms of the provisions of the Act. The services of the petitioner's husband came to be provincialised accordingly in terms of the provisions of the Act. The husband of the petitioner died on 01.09.2007. Page No.# 3/5 4. When a dispute arose as regards the date from which the period of services of the provincialised panchayat employees were to be counted for the purpose of pension and other retirement dues under the provisions of the Act, litigations ensued. A Division Bench of this Court in a writ appeal, Writ Appeal no. 145/2009 [The State of Assam & another vs. Syed Md. Fazlay Rabbi] and a batch of writ petitions in its common judgment and order dated 24.03.2010 set the issue at rest by holding that the benefits of the provisions of the Assam Panchayat Employees [Provincialisation] Act, 1999 [the Act] including those for pension and other retirement dues would be available to the provincialised employees in service on or after 01.10.1991 on the basis of the length of their services reckoned from the dates of their initial appointments. Special leave petitions, Special Leave to Appeal [Civil] Nos. 19351- 19360/2010 preferred against the common judgment and order dated 24.03.2010 were dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 02.08.2010. Thereafter, the State Government in the Pension and Public Grievances Department issued a Notification dated 17.03.2011, whereby, it had ordered that the benefits of the provisions of the Assam Panchayat Employees [Provincialisation] Act, 1999 [the Act] including those for pension and other retirement dues applicable to the State Government Employees, would also be available to the provincialised Panchayat Employees who were in service on or after 01.10.1991 on the basis of the length of their service reckoned from the dates of their initial appointments in the service of Panchayats. The said Notification was issued with the concurrence of the Finance Department. 5. The Pension Payment Order being PPO No. ADP/PRI/PPO/GPO/2011/000223, issued in respect of petitioner's husband. The Page No.# 4/5 total period of service rendered by the petitioner’s husband was 40 years, 03 months and 28 days. Yet, the pension disbursal authority had calculated the petitioner's husband’s monthly pension @ Rs. 1561/- per month with the observation that a period of 13 years 01 month and 23 days could not be counted for the purpose of pension and the petitioner's net qualifying service would be only 27 years 02 months and 5 days. 6. A conjoint reading of the judgment and order dated 24.03.2010 passed in a writ appeal, Writ Appeal no. 145/2009 [The State of Assam & another vs. Syed Md. Fazlay Rabbi], the Notification dated 17.03.2011, unerringly points out to the position that for the purpose of pension and other retirement dues, the entire period service 40 years, 03 months and 28 days from the petitioner's husband's date of entry in service i.e. 03.10.1963 to till his date of retirement, 31.01.2004 is required to be counted for the purpose of pension and other retirement dues. As such, the decision not to count a period of 13 years 01 month and 23 days for the purpose of pension and making calculation of the pension amount on that basis is found to be incongruent and impermissible and accordingly, the same are set aside. 7. As a corollary, the respondent authorities shall now work out the entitlement of the pension and other retirement dues of the petitioner's husband by counting his total period of service as 40 years, 03 months and 28 days and issue a fresh Pension Payment Order in supersession of the earlier Pension Payment order. The entire exercise shall be undertaken and completed within a period of 2 [two] months from the date submission of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner at the office of the respondent no. 4 and the Page No.# 5/5 respondent no. 5. In the event such exercise is not completed within a period of 2 [two] months from the said date, the same will carry an interest of 6% per annum. 8. The writ petition stands allowed and disposed of in terms of the above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant