Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010056892024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/155/2024 BULBULI KHATUN S/O- LATE ABDUL HOQUE, R/O- VILL.- JHOWDANGA PART-III, P.O. JHOWDANGA, P.S. MANKACHAR, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS VIRENDRA MITTAL AND ANR THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:ATAUR RAHMAN THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MANKACHAR SOUTH SALMARA DIVISION (IRRIGATION) HATSINGIMARI P.O. FEKAMARI DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783135 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN, MR. S H ZAMAN,N ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 29.10.2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted on instructions that the directions contained in the order Page No.# 2/3 dated 15.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 7656/2022 has been complied with and therefore, the petitioner does not want to pursue with this matter any further. Vide the order dated 15.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 7656/2022, the writ petition was disposed of with the following directions: “8. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The respondent authorities in the Irrigation Department are directed to release the arrear pension, if any, as well as the pensionary benefits to which Late Abdul Hoque would have been entitled to had he been alive and not paid to Late Abdul Hoque during his lifetime; to the petitioner and the respondent No. 7 in equal proportions. (ii) The family pension in the instant case be paid to the petitioner by the respondent authorities. The respondent No. 7 shall have a claim over the said family pension upon the same being paid to the petitioner if the respondent No. 7 is not adequately maintained and in that regard the respondent No. 7 would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum, if so aggrieved. (iii) If the petitioner and the respondent No. 7 enters into an acceptable mode of settlement, the same be brought to the notice of the respondent authority and the State respondent would be at liberty to pay the family pension to the petitioner and the respondent No. 7 separately in terms with the settlement reached between the petitioner and the respondent No. 7. (iv) The entire exercise be carried out by the respondent authorities in the Irrigation Department within 2(two) months from the date of certified copy of the instant order is served upon the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Irrigation Department, Dispur, Guwahati and thereafter send papers to the Office of the respondent No. 3 who shall within 1(one) month pass appropriate orders thereby granting the entitlement as mentioned herein above. 9. Before concluding, this Court finds it relevant to mention that the above directions in paragraph No. 8 (supra) have been issued on the basis that late Abdul Hoque was entitled to pension and pensionary benefits and his family would be entitled to family pension. It is made clear that in the circumstances, the respondents are of the opinion that the services Page No.# 3/3 rendered by Late Abdul Hoque was not pensionable and further not entitled to family pension then the above directions shall not apply. In such eventuality, the Commissioner and Secretary, Irrigation Department shall within two months from the date of service of the certified copy of this Judgment shall pass a reasoned order why the service rendered by late Abdul Hoque was not pensionable and also not entitled to family pension. In such circumstances, the petitioner and/or the respondent No. 7 would be at liberty to challenge such order in accordance with law. 10. With the above observation and directions, the petition stands disposed of.” In the said writ petition, the present contempt petitioner was arrayed as respondent no. 7. Since the order was not complied with, the contempt petition was filed. During the pendency of the contempt petition, the respondents have complied with the directions contained in the order dated 15.03.2023 passed in WP(C)/7656/2022 as extracted above. In that view of the matter and taking into consideration the submissions made, this Court is not inclined to proceed any further with the contempt proceeding. The contempt petition accordingly stands closed. Notices issued earlier, stands recalled. JUDGE Comparing Assistant