Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010228462025 2026:GAU-AS:10549 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6061/2025 SANI NAZMI BINTE ALI D/O- LATE SAUKAT ALI AND LATE AZIMA BEGUM. R/O- VILL.- RANAGAGARAH HUZ, TANPARA, P.O.- HUZ RANAGAGARAH, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782002. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT ASSAM UJANBAZAR GUWAHATI-1 3:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER P.O. AND DIST.- NAGAON PIN-782001. 4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI-29. 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 Page No.# 2/8 6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS TRAINING PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- -BEFORE- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR Advocated for petitioner: Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel Advocate for Respondent: Mr. B. Chakravarty, SC, Accountant General, Mr. A. Chakravarty, G.A, Assam Mr. A. Chaliha, SC, Finance. Date on which judgment is reserved: 16.07.2026 Date of pronouncement of judgment: 31.07.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the operative part of the judgment?: No Whether the full judgment has been pronounced? : Yes JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV) 1. Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Chakravarty, learned Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 3 & 6; Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned Standing Counsel for the Accountant General (A & E) and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel for the Finance Department. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the letter dated 20.10.2023 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government Page No.# 3/8 of Assam, Administrative Reforms, Training, Pension & Public Grievances Department, by which the Accountant General, Assam had been informed that unmarried dependent daughters of retired Government servants were not entitled to receive two family pensions. 3. The petitioner claims to be the unmarried dependent daughter of late Saukat Ali, who was working as a Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer and late Azima Begum, who was working as a Supervisor in the Social Welfare Department. The parents of the petitioner were Government servants and were entitled to pension. The father of the petitioner retired from service on 31.08.2009 and expired on 22.02.2016. After his demise, the mother of the petitioner, who was serving in the Social Welfare Department, was granted a family pension in respect of the services rendered by the father of the petitioner. The mother of the petitioner herself retired from service on 30.04.2011 and subsequently expired on 20.10.2022. The respondent authorities do not dispute that during her lifetime, after her superannuation, the mother of the petitioner was receiving family pension arising out of the services rendered by the father of the petitioner, in addition to her own pension which accrued on account of the services rendered by her to the State of Assam. 4. After the death of her mother, the petitioner applied for grant of family pension relatable to the services rendered by her father, as well as for the family pension which she claims to be entitled to on account of the services rendered by her mother. The family pension arising out of the services rendered by the father of the petitioner was released in her favour by issuing The FPPO No.928522318457 dated 16.07.2024. However, the FPPO contained a typographical error in the name of the petitioner and such error was corrected by corrigendum dated 26.09.2024 issued by the Senior Accounts Officer, Office Page No.# 4/8 of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Assam. 5. The petitioner, on not being granted the family pension relatable to the service rendered by her mother, approached the respondent authorities and was informed that by a communication dated 20.10.2023, the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Administrative Reforms, Training, Pension and Public Grievances (ARTPPG) Department, informed the Accountant General, Assam, that under the existing provisions of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, the question of entitlement of an unmarried dependent daughter to two family pensions does not arise. The said communication has been put to challenge by the writ petitioner in the present writ petition. 6. The Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, ARTPPG Department, has filed an affidavit-in-opposition, wherein, it has been stated that as per provisions of Note-2, under Rule 141 of the Assam Services Pension Rules, 1969, only a minor child is entitled to receive two family pensions up to the age of 18 years in case of a son and up to the age of 21 years in case of a daughter, when both parents of the child had served the government. 7. It has been further stated that in case of daughters, after attaining the age of 21 years, she would continue to be eligible for drawing family pension as an unmarried dependent daughter till the time she remains unmarried and unemployed. Ironically, the affidavit also states that the ARTPPG Department does not deal with pension payment of Government servants and the Department of Pension and Public Grievances is the Administrative Department for formulation of policies relating to pensions and other retirement benefits for Government Employees under the State of Assam. 8. The Social Justice and Empowerment Department, the Accountant General Page No.# 5/8 (A&E) Assam and the Finance Department have not filed any response to the writ petition, although notices were issued on 29.10.2025. 9. Mr. I.H. Hazarika, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that, by the amendment dated 09.08.2018, the Assam Services (Pension Amendment Rules 2018) had been amended, amongst others, to the extent that the words “unmarried minor daughters” were required to be substituted by the words “unmarried dependent daughters”. A further amendment had also been incorporated in Sub-Rule 2, Clause-C, inserting a proviso that the family pension shall be allowed to continue beyond 21 years of age to an “unmarried dependent daughter” of a Government servant or pensioner, subject to the fulfillment of the condition that there is no disabled child eligible for lifetime “Family Pension” and that a certificate of non-marriage and non-employment in the prescribed format certified by the CO/BDO concerned should be furnished by the unmarried dependent daughter to the Treasury or the Bank once a year. 10. The learned counsel has submitted that in view of the above, it is apparent that an unmarried dependent daughter of a pensioner would be eligible to draw family pension beyond 21 years of age. The learned counsel has submitted that there is nothing in the Pension Rules which debars an “unmarried dependent daughter” of Government servants from drawing family pension of both the father and the mother also in the event both her parents had served the State of Assam and were drawing pension. He has accordingly prayed that the respondent authorities be directed to issue a pension payment order to the petitioner with regard to the services rendered by her mother, in addition to the family pension already being granted to her with regard to the services rendered by her father to the state of Assam. Page No.# 6/8 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the stand of the Joint Secretary in the ARTPPG Department, that unmarried dependent daughters are not entitled to get two CPFs, is without any basis. 12. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the ARTPPG Department has submitted that the unmarried dependent daughter could be entitled to family pension of only one parent since the unmarried dependent daughter family pension is a category different from the regular family pension and it is not a continuation of the family pension, which she receives as a minor up to the age of 21 years. 13. Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Finance Department, had been given an accommodation on 04.06.2026 to obtain instructions with regard to the provisions of the Assam Services (Pension Rules 1969) and also as to whether an unmarried dependent daughter of a deceased Government servant can be denied the benefit of 2 family pensions, without there being any provision to that effect in the Pension Rules of 1969. 14. During the hearing of the matter, the learned counsel has submitted that there is no notification denying the benefit of two family pensions to an “unmarried dependent daughter” of persons who had served the State of Assam. He has submitted that, in fact, minor children, be it sons or daughters, are entitled to two family pensions, relatable to the service of both the parents and it is only in the absence of any clear directions that the unmarried dependent daughters, like the petitioner, have not been paid two family pensions. 15. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the relevant rules including the amendment notified on 09.08.2018 and considered the facts Page No.# 7/8 and circumstances of the case. It had already been noticed by this Court, as a prima facie view, that the ARTPPG department had stated in its affidavit that it does not deal with the payment of pension to Government servants and it does not hold the responsibility for formulation of policy relating to pension and other retirement benefits of employees of the Government of Assam. 16. In such circumstances, this court does not have any hesitation in quashing the Communication dated 20.10.2023, by which, the Joint Secretary to the ARTPPG Department had sought to clarify to the Accountant General, Assam, that the unmarried dependent daughter, as in the case of the petitioner, would not be entitled to two family pensions, even in case both the parents had served the State of Assam. 17. The amendment to the Assam Services (Pension Rules) brought into force by the Notification dated 09.08.2018 substituted the words “unmarried minor daughters” by the words “unmarried dependent daughters”. Thus, in the considered view of this Court, an “unmarried dependent daughter” of Government servants would be entitled to family pension in the same manner as would a wife or husband or “minor son” be entitled to. In other words, in such circumstances when the respondents do not take a stand that the “minor sons” of Government servants would not be entitled to two pensions, the respondents also cannot take a stand that an “unmarried dependent daughter” would not be entitled to two family pensions. 18. It is also noticed that a spouse of a deceased Government servant would be entitled to draw the family pension relatable to the Service of the deceased Government servant in addition to the pension being drawn by the pensioner on account of her own services rendered to the Government. Minor son and minor daughters are also entitled to draw the family pension relatable to the services Page No.# 8/8 of both their parents. 19. In such circumstances, this Court does not see any reason to deny an unmarried dependent daughter of a retired Government servant the benefit of drawing two family pensions, when both her parents had served the State of Assam and she, during the lifetime of her parents, was dependent on both her parents equally. In the present case, it is not the stand of the respondents that the petitioner herein is either married or was not dependent on any of the parents during their lifetime. It is also not their stand that the present petitioner would not be dependent on the family pension of her parents till the time she secures employment. 20. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned letter dated 20.10.2023 is set aside and quashed. The respondent authorities shall take up immediate steps to ensure that the family pension relatable to the service rendered by her mother shall be released w.e.f 20.10.2022 at the earliest and in any case within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondent shall also ensure that such disbursal of payment of pension to the petitioner relatable to the services of the mother shall not in any manner hamper or tamper with the family pension already been drawn by her relatable to the services rendered by her father to the State of Assam. 21. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 22. No costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant