Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010042892025 2025:GAU-AS:3636 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1324/2025 NAZMUL HASAN, RETIRED HEAD MASTER, BAKRIHOWAR M.E. MADRASSA, P.O. KALINAGAR, DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN 788801. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI -6. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER HAILAKANDI ASSAM 4:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N ISLAM, MS. L WAJEEDA,MR R I BHUYAN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 28-03-2025 Heard Ms. L Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Kaushik, learned counsel for the Elementary Education Department and Ms. DD Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 4. 2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter dated 04.05.2019 issued by the respondent No. 9, in respect of wrong fixation of the petitioner’s salary w.e.f. 01.01.1989 and has also prayed for a direction to be issued to the respondents for finalization of his pension and other retirement benefits. 3. The petitioner’s case is that he had retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2016 and despite a lapse of more than 9 (nine) years, the wrong fixation of the petitioner’s salary and pension and other retirement benefits has not been corrected or made by the State respondent. 4. The DEEO, Hailakandi has submitted letter No. DEH/March/2025/1257 dated 27.03.2025, which is addressed to the Director, Elementary Education, which is to the effect that there was an excess drawal of pay by the petitioner, which had been adjusted by deducting the excess salary paid from the monthly pension and from the DCRG amount payable to the petitioner. The DEEO, Hailakandi has also submitted letter dated 12.11.2021 issued to the Director of Pension, wherein it states that there had been excess drawal of salary amounting to Rs.7,34,363/- and it appeared that there was no fault or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner, while drawing such excess Page No.# 3/3 amount. 5. Ms. L Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the letters dated 27.03.2025 and 12/11/2021 issued by the DEEO, Hailakandi, she would like to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to file afresh, to enable the petitioner to make a challenge to the deduction of the excess salary from the petitioner’s monthly pension and DCRG. The prayer of the petitioner’s counsel is allowed. 6. The writ petition is dismissed is withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for. 7. The letter dated 27.03.2025 along with other annexures, including the letter dated 12.11.2021 issued by the DEEO, Hailakandi are made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-‘X’ collectively. 8. Ms. L Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a copy of the Annexure-X has been furnished to her just now. 9. The personal appearance of the DEEO, Hailakandi is dispensed with. JUDGE Comparing Assistant