Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010146322024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5260/2024 MAHENDRA NATH KALITA AND 2 ORS S/O- LATE LAKHESWAR KALITA, R/O- VILLAGE- PANJABARI, BATAHGHULI, TINIALI, H.NO-84, P.S-SATGAON, P.O- PANJABARI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI-37 2: GHANASHYAM DAS S/O- LATE TICKHA RAM DAS R/O- VILLAGE- PANJABARI BATAHGHULI TINIALI H.NO-47 P.S-SATGAON P.O- PANJABARI DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-37 3: KUMUD RANJAN RAJBONGSHI S/O- LATE KULA RAJBONGSHI R/O- VILLAGE- PANJABARI BATAHGHULI TINIALI H.NO-22 Page No.# 2/5 P.S-SATGAON P.O- PANJABARI DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-3 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SECRETARIAT COMPLEX, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME (POLICE) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 4:THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B RAMCHIARY, MR. P J DAS,MS T RAMCHIARY,MS A RAMCHIARY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, MR. R BORPUJARI,MR. J K GOSWAMI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 24.04.2025 Page No.# 3/5 Heard Mr. B. Ramchiary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. U. Sharma, learned Junior Government Advocate appearing for the State of Assam. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners praying for release of pensionary benefits with arrears from the date of their initial joining in the services to be paid up to the date of the last payments of their pension on regular basis along with interest and other promotional increments and benefits under the provisions of MACP/ACP. The three petitioners are ex-servicemen and after taking voluntary retirement they were appointed under Prevention of Infiltration of Foreigners (P.I.F.) Scheme. Subsequently they were superannuated on various dates. They rendered more than 10 years of service under the P.I.F. Scheme and therefore, they claimed to be eligible for time scale increments under provisions of MACP/ACP etc. The learned counsel for the respondents have contested the case and filed their affidavit. The respondents disputed the contention of the petitioners that they are not entitled for payment of pension w.e.f. their respective date of superannuation. According to the respondents as per the Office Memorandum dated 21.01.2019 the pensionary benefits are made effective from 01.09.2015 as have been decided by the Government. In pursuance to the said O.M. dated 21.01.2019, the petitioners have been granted their pensionary benefits however, there are no averments in the affidavit filed, in respect of the claims made by the petitioners for other benefits like DCRG, Leave Encashment, Gr.I/ Commutation etc. On the contrary, it is stated in the affidavit that the Page No.# 4/5 petitioners’ benefits under the MACPS are under consideration and have been placed before the Screening Committee. Once the Screening Committee approves their claims, the pending dues under the MACPS will be disbursed to the petitioners. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard. Pleadings available on record have been perused. Although the petitioners in their writ petition initially prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents for releasing their pension by counting their services w.e.f. the date of their initial joining in service. However, in the course of the hearing of the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have no grievance with regard to the date from which the pension has been granted i.e. 01.09.2015 in terms of the O.M. dated 21.01.2019. However, the grievance of the petitioners at present is that the pension is calculated on the last drawn pay and as the increments they are entitled to are not granted, the calculation of the pension on the last drawn pay is thereby affected and they suffer financial losses. The petitioners have not been able to place before the Court any specific representations submitted before the authorities concerned with regard to their claims. On the other hand from the affidavit filed it is seen that their claims for grant of MACPS is under consideration and subject to approval of the screening committee the same will be disbursed. Under such circumstances, since the petitioners claim DCRG, Leave Encashment, Gr.I/ Commutation etc. and other enhancement increments in their pay and since there are no averments made in the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 6 to the effect as to whether such claims made by the petitioner Page No.# 5/5 were at all examined, we permit the petitioners to file a detailed representation before the respondent no. 6. The representations should clearly spell out the claims made by the petitioners. Upon filing the said representation(s) along with the certified copy of the order passed today, the authorities will pass a speaking order thereon within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of such representation. The pendency of the consideration of the said representation if filed shall not be a bar to release the payments towards the MACPS if the petitioners are otherwise found to be entitled to by the screening committee. With the above observation writ petition stands disposed, no order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant