Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010205482022 2025:GAU-AS:7275 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6929/2022 BHAGYA DEKA @ BHAGYA DEKA DAS @ BHAGYA DAS W/O- LT. GANGA RAM DEKA, R/O- VILL- SANKARDEV NAGAR, WARD NO- 9, P.O. AND P.S. MORIGAON, DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782105 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REP. BY COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT., ASSAM SACHIBALAYA, DISPUR, GHY-06 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT. ASSAM SACHIBALAYA DISPUR GHY-06 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) CHANDMARI GHY-03 4:THE TREASURY OFFICER MORIGAON TREASURY MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782105 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT. MORIGAON RURAL ROADS DIVISION P.O. AND DIST.- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782105 Page No.# 2/6 6:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GHY-29 ASSAM 7:FINANCE DEPTT. REP. BY SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR ASSAM SACHIVALAYA GHY-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N BORUAH, MS B SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, PWD,SC, AG,SC, FINANCE BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE O R D E R Date : 04.06.2025. Heard Mr. N. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, Mr. B. Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the PWD, for respondent No.3, Mr. R. Barpujari, learned standing counsel, Finance Department for respondent Nos.4 & 7 and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned standing counsel for the Accountant General, for respondent No.6. 2. Challenge made in this writ petition is to the communication dated 08.05.2019, issued by the Executive Engineer, PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Division, whereby, the claim of the petitioner for family pension is rejected on the ground that the deceased husband of the petitioner had retired during April, Page No.# 3/6 1996 and as per Pension Payment Order, the deceased had submitted only single photograph, instead of joint photograph with his wife and also did not mention about his family/wife as well as his nominee. 3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is the wife of Late Gangaram Deka, who claims to have solemnized their marriage on 02.10.1985 as per the Hindu rituals, for which a certificate was issued by the concerned Headman of the locality on 04.08.2014. The husband of the petitioner who was working as a Chowkidar under the PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Sub-Division, since 25.07.1960 had retired from service on 30.04.1996. The deceased husband of the petitioner was granted the pension upto 31.03.2015, as he had expired on 31.03.2015, due to his old age, leaving behind the petitioner and a son, namely, Ajit Deka. Being the legally married wife of Late Gangaram Deka, the petitioner approached the respondent authorities for payment of family pension. 4. The Treasury Officer, Morigaon, vide letter dated 16.01.2017, has forwarded the case of the petitioner regarding authorization of family pension to the Accountant General (A & E), Assam. 5. Thereafter, the Executive Engineer, PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Division, vide the impugned communication dated 08.05.2019, addressing to the petitioner has rejected the claim for family pension in respect of her deceased husband Late Gangaram Deka, on the ground that he had only submitted the single photograph, instead of joint photograph with his wife and has not mentioned about the wife as well as the nominee. Page No.# 4/6 6. Mr. N. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the deceased husband of the petitioner joined the PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Sub- Division in the year 1960 and the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with her deceased husband on 02.10.1985, perhaps the name of the petitioner as wife as well as the nominee might not have been entered into the service book including the pension payment order. While referring to the documents annexed to the writ petition, Mr. Boruan, learned counsel submits that it is clear from the death certificate as well as the certificate issued by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon, particularly, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon that the petitioner is the legally married wife of Late Gangaram Deka and out of their wedlock, a son is born, namely, Sri Ajit Deka. Therefore, merely not mentioning of the name of the petitioner as a nominee or for that matter, non-submission of joint photograph, would not precluded her from entitlement of the family pension. 7. Mr. B. Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the PWD, referring to the impugned communication as well as the pension payment order submits that the incumbent has neither submitted the joint photograph with his wife nor submitted any other documentary proof about his marriage and details of his spouse at the time of submission of the pension papers. The deceased husband of the petitioner had not submitted only the above requirements on his best knowledge and belief and therefore, the authority had to submit his marital status as single and which cannot be changed by the respondents, after the death of the incumbent. He submits that the husband of the petitioner has been paid the pension till 2015, during his lifetime and since the petitioner has submitted the application claiming pension, after the lapse of four (4) years, the respondents had no option other than to reject the claim of the petitioner. Page No.# 5/6 8. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials placed on record. 9. Admittedly, the deceased husband of the petitioner Late Gangaram Deka served as a Chowkidar under the PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Sub-Division, since 25.07.1960 and retired from service on 30.04.1996. The deceased husband of the petitioner was receiving the pension till his death on 31.03.2015. It is also an admitted position that the deceased husband of the petitioner has not submitted the joint photograph with the petitioner nor any nominee has been entered in the pension payment order. 10. It is noticed that the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon has issued a certificate on 19.03.2016, wherein it is clearly mentioned the next of kin of Late Gangaram Deka. The name of the petitioner as the wife and one Sri Ajit Deka are clearly reflected in the certificate issued by the competent authority, which is also not disputed. The only ground of rejection appears to be non-submission of joint photograph as well as non-mentioning the name of the wife as the nominee, in the service book as well as the pension payment order. 11. The right to family pension is a statutory right and such right cannot be defeated even by making a nomination to the contrary and if any nomination be made contrary to the statute, the said nomination would not be operative. The proposition of law is well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of G.L. Bhatia vs. Union of India and another, reported in (1999) 5 SCC 237. 12. In the present case, as noted here-in-above, there is no dispute to the Page No.# 6/6 fact that the petitioner is the wife of Late Gangaram Deka. The deceased husband of the petitioner although has neither submitted any joint photograph nor mentioned the name of the petitioner as nominee in the service book as well as in the pension payment order, in my view, that would not preclude the right of the petitioner to receive family pension. Thus, the rejection of the claim of the petitioner to her entitlement of family pension cannot be sustained. 13. Having considered the above, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the family pension in respect of her husband Late Gangaram Deka, being the legally married wife which is supported by the certificate issued by the competent authority. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent authorities, shall consider the case of the petitioner with regard to the claim of family pension, in view of the observation made here-in-above. 14. The petitioner is directed to furnish all the requisite documents, particularly, to the respondent No.5 the Executive Engineer, PWD, Morigaon Rural Road Division, within a period of fifteen (15) days from today. On such approach, the respondent authorities shall consider the matter and complete the process within a period of three (3) months, from the date of approach. Thereafter, it is expected that all the concerned respondents shall considered and grant/release the family pension to the petitioner. 15. Writ petition stands allowed as indicated above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant