Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010057262025 2025:GAU-AS:4407 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1977/2025 SMTI DIPTI RANI DEY W/O SRI SALIL KR DEY R/O MAIBANG BAZAR, PO MAIBANG, PS MAIBANG , DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN 788831 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT OF ASSAM EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILI PARA GUWAHATI 19 3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL DIMAHASAO DISTRICT CIRCLE HAFLONG ASSAM PIN 788831 4:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DIMAHASAO AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DISTRICT HAFLONG ASSAM PIN 788819 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DIMA HASAO DIMAHASAO DISTRICT HAFLONG ASSAM PIN 788819 6:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HAFLONG COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 7:THE TREASURY OFFICER Page No.# 2/5 MAIBAND TREASURY MAIBANG DIST DIMAHASAO ASSAM 8:THE CHIEF MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA HAFLONG DIST DIMA HASAO PIN 788819 9:THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA MAIBANG BRANCH MAIBANG DIST DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN 78883 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H TALUKDAR, MR. K D SARMA,MR. R SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., SC, FINANCE,GA, ASSAM,SC, DIMA HASAO BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 09.04.2025 Heard Mr. H. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Das, learned Standing Counsel for the Secondary Education Department, Ms. R. M. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7, Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 and Ms. J. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by non-inclusion of her name in Clause 13 of the PPO No. ADP/PPO/GPO/2023/088567. The petitioner’s case is that her deceased son with her husband Salil Kumar Dey, i.e. the Late Sanjoy Kr. Dey, a Science Graduate Teacher at Maibang Higher Secondary School, went missing since 25.08.2010. The petitioner thereafter lodged an FIR before the Maibang Police Station. However, the police failed to trace out her son and accordingly, the In- Page No.# 3/5 charge of Maibang P.S. issued a report on 10.04.2011, to the effect that the petitioner’s son was missing. 3. The petitioner’s case is that the petitioner thereafter submitted an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Dima Hasao, Assam, which led to the Deputy Commissioner issuing an order dated 29.02.2020, declaring the petitioner’s son Sanjoy Kr. Dey as dead. 4. The office of the Deputy Commissioner thereafter issued the legal heir certificate on 07.06.2021, which is as follows:- “LEGAL HEIR CERTIFICATE This is to certify that Shri/Smti Dipti Rani Dey, R/O Maibang Bazar P.S. Maibang Dist Dima Hasao is the mother and legal heir of Late Sanjoy Kr. Dey who died on 29.02.2020 leaving the following relations at the time of his/her death. Sl. No. NAME RELATIONSHIP AGE 1 Shri Salil Kr. Dey Father 72 2. Smti. Dipti Rani Dey Mother 63 3. Shri Sandip Kumar Dey Brother 35 Being the legal heir(s) Shri/Smti Dipti Rani Dey is entitled to receive the pensionary benefits such as gratuity/GIS/ GPF etc. and all amounts standing in the name of the deceased” Page No.# 4/5 5. A death certificate was also issued on 04.11.2020, showing that that the son of the petitioner and Salil Kr. Dey, i.e. Sanjoy Kr. Dey, had expired on 29.02.2020. 6. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner’s name should be included in the details of family members of her deceased son, as the absence of her name can lead to stoppage of family pension, when her husband Salil Kr. Dey expires. 7. The petitioner’s counsel further submits that he does not wish to press the prayer for being given the family pension in the name of the petitioner and that the family pension can be continued to be given to her husband Salil Kr. Dey. He also submits that the petitioner’s husband had submitted a representation to the Director of Pension (respondent No. 6) and Treasury Officer, Maibang (respondent No.7), praying for inclusion of the name of the petitioner, as a family member of the deceased. 8. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the said representation dated 29.07.2024 issued by the petitioner’s husband should be considered by the respondent No. 6. 9. The respondents’ counsels submit that they do not have any objection to the prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel. 10. In view of the consent of the parties herein being with regard to the questions of facts, this Court is of the view that the respondent No.6 should Page No.# 5/5 take a decision as to whether the petitioner is the mother of the deceased Sanjoy Kr. Dey. The respondent No.6 will also verify whether the documents relied upon by the petitioner are genuine. The respondent No.6 will also give an opportunity of hearing to Salil Kumar Dey and Sandip Kumar Dey before coming to a decision. In the event the respondent No.6 comes to a decision that the petitioner is the mother of the deceased Sanjoy Kr. Dey, the petitioner’s name should be included in the details of family members of the deceased Sanjoy Kr. Dey by the concerned authority. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 11. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant