Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010254912024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6457/2024 JABEDA BIBI W/O- LATE HASAN ALI MIAH, R/O- BOROBALA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILLAGE- LOHAJANI, P.O.- MORAGODADHAR, DISTRICT- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783335 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR SIX MILE GUWAHATI-37 5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PARISHAD DHUBRI PO AND DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 7:THE TREASURY OFFICER DHUBRI TREASURY PO AND DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ISLAM, MS A KHATUN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE,SC, P AND R.D. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER Date : 03.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. M Islam, learned Standing counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S Dutta, learned counsel for Panchayat and Rural Development Department. 2. The prayer in this writ petition is a direction 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 was appointed in the service of the Zilla Parishad, Dhubri on 01.07.1969. During the tenure of his 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 Secretaries are to be provided pension and other retirement dues in terms of the provisions of the Page No.# 3/5 Act. The services of the petitioner's husband came to be provincialised accordingly in terms of the provisions of the Act. The petitioner's husband, namely, Hasen Ali Miah retired from service on 31.01.2007 as Office Peon under the Zilla Parishad, Dhubri on reaching the age of superannuation. Subsequently, the husband of the petitioner expired on 01.05.2013. 4. When a dispute arose as regards the date from which the period of services of the provincialised Panchayat Secretaries were to be counted for the purpose of pension and other retirement dues under the provisions of the Act, litigations ensued. 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/2011/000136, Page No.# 4/5 issued in respect of petitioner's husband has specifically stated that the date of petitioner's husband entry in service is 01.07.1969 and his date of retirement is 31.01.2007. The total period of service rendered by the petitioner was 33 years 3 months 29 days. Yet, the pension disbursal authority had calculated the petitioner's monthly pension @ Rs. 1,389/- per month with the observation that a period of 05 years 11 months and 06 days could not be counted for the purpose of pension and the petitioner's net qualifying service would be only 27 years 4 months and 28 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 33 years 3 months 29 days from the petitioner's husband's date of entry in service i.e. 01.07.1969 to till his date of retirement, 31.01.2007 is required to be counted for the purpose of pension and other retirement dues. As such, the decision not to count a period of 5 years 11 months and 06 days for the purpose of pension and making calculation of the pension amount on that basis is found to be incongruent and impermissible and contrary to the ratio laid down in Fazle Rabbi (Supro). 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 33 years 3 months 29 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 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. Page No.# 5/5 JUDGE Comparing Assistant