Page No.# 1/15 GAHC010261402024 2026:GAU-AS:13794 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6631/2024 ABUL KALAM AZAD AND 9 ORS S/O LATE KOBAD HUSSAIN R/O VILL- NIZ MONIRCHAR P.O. SARKARER GAON, P.S. SOUTH SALMARA, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA- MANKACHAR, PIN-783127 2: DILRANJAN DAS S/O LATE ASWINI KUMAR DAS R/O VILL- NORTH SALMARA P.O. PT.I NORTH SALMARA P.S. ABHYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN-783383 3: MD. MOTLEB HOSSAIN S/O LATE NAZIR HOSSAIN R/O VILL- NATIMER ALGA PT. 2 P.O. POCERCHAR P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783127 4: ABDUL WAHEB MIAH S/O LATE ABDUL KAYEM PANDIT R/O VILL - BALA DOBA PO. AND P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR Page No.# 2/15 ASSAM PIN-783127 5: ABDUL KAFI CHOUDHURY S/O LATE SONAULLAH SHEIK R/O VILL- ASAMER ALGA P.O. POCHARCHAR P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783127 6: ANOWAR HOSSAIN CHOWDHURY S/O LATE KOLIM UDDIN CHOWDHARY R/O VILL BORKALIA CHARARPAR P.O. BARKALIA P.S. FOKIRGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783330. 7: NURAL ISLAM S/O LATE SAPIAL HAQUE R/O VILL- FEKAMARI P.O. FEKAMARI P.S. SOUTH SALMARA ASSAM DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783135 8: ABDUL HAMID S/O LATE ROSHOM ALI R/O VILL- BORAIKANDI P.O. TAMNI P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA-MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783127 9: ASHRAFUL HAQUE S/O LATE BHOLA SK. R/O VILL- CHOTO KAZIRGAON P.O. HAZIRHAT P.S. SUKCHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA-MANKACHAR ASSAM Page No.# 3/15 PIN-783127 10: NOZRUL ISLAM S/O LATE ABDUL WAHAB SARKAR R/O VILL- UZAN BAZAR P.O. HAZIRHAT P.S. SUKCHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA-MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78312 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 791019 ASSAM 4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL SOUTH SALMARA PIN-783127 DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL DHUBRI PIN-783301 DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 6:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER Page No.# 4/15 SOUTH SALMARA PIN-783127 DIST. SOUTH SALMARA- MANKACHAR ASSAM 7:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B D DAS, MR J LOTHA,MR. H R DAS,MR D BANIA,MRS R DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 08.09.2026 Heard Mr. B D Das, Learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mrs. R Deka, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners. Also heard Mr. B Talukdar, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Elementary Education, Assam appearing for Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 and Mr. R Borpujari, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Finance, Assam, appearing for Respondent No. 2. 2. The Petitioners, by instituting the present Writ Petition, has prayed for a direction upon the Respondent authorities to extend to the Petitioners, the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) as prevalent under the provisions of Assam Services Page No.# 5/15 (Pension) Rules, 1969. 3. The facts, in brief, requisite for adjudication of the issue arising in the present Writ Petition, is noticed as under. 3.1 The Petitioners, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 28.12.1996, issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, towards inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up of around 7500 (Seven Thousand Five Hundred) posts of Assistant Teachers lying vacant in various provincialized Lower Primary (LP) and Upper Primary (UP) Schools in different districts of the State, had submitted their respective applications. The Petitioners, thereafter, being found to be eligible for participating in the Selection Process, had participated, therein, and thereafter, the Petitioners were selected by the South Salmara-Manckachar Sub-Divisional Level Teachers’ Selection Board and their names were incorporated in the select list so published 23.11.1998, by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, South Salmara-Mankachar, Hatsingimari. 3.2 The Petitioner, although were included in the select list so published in pursuance to the advertisement dated Page No.# 6/15 28.12.1996, the Petitioners were not extended with orders of appointment and accordingly, being aggrieved, the Petitioners had approached this Court, by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP© No. 4608/2006. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court, vide an order dated 01.04.2008, directing the Respondent authorities to take all necessary steps for issuance of appointment order(s), in respect of the Petitioners, within the time frame prescribed, therein. 3.3 The Petitioners, excluding the Petitioner No. 9, were thereafter, appointed, vide an order dated 27.02.2009, as Assistant Teachers in different Schools within the district of South Salmara. The Petitioner No. 9 was so appointed vide an order dated 13.12.2011. The Petitioners were initially appointed as Stipendiary Teachers with a fixed stipend of Rs. 1800/- (Rupees One Thousand Eight Hundred) per month, which was being revised from time to time. 3.4 As is prescribed in the Rules, the Petitioners were deputed for undergoing their Junior Basic Teachers’ Training (JBT) and the Petitioner, on clearing the examination conducted Page No.# 7/15 on conclusion of the said Training, the Petitioners were authorized their pay and allowances in the pay-scale, prescribed for the post of Assistant Teacher. The Petitioners having been appointed after 01.02.2005, they were covered under the provisions of the New Pension Scheme (NPS). Being aggrieved, the Petitioners had submitted representations before the Respondent authorities for covering them under the provisions of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), as prevalent under the provisions of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. 3.5 The said relief, not being granted to the Petitioners, the Petitioners, by referring to the judgment and order dated 25.11.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 4961/2023, in respect of similarly situated persons working as Assistant Teachers in Morigaon district, have instituted the present Writ Petition. 4. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, by reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that although the Petitioners, herein, were appointed after 01.02.2005, the process of recruitment in their respect, was Page No.# 8/15 initiated with the issuance of the advertisement dated 28.12.1996. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that the select list in the matter was also published on 23.11.1998 and it was only on account of the delay occasioning on the part of the Respondent authorities that the appointment of the Petitioners were held delayed and for the purpose, they had also to approach this Court earlier. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners has further referred to the minutes of a meeting held on 15.03.2024, between the Chief Minister of Assam and the Sadou Assam Karmachari Parishad, wherein, it was decided that the Govt. of Assam would consider extending the benefits of Old Pension Scheme (OPS), to those employees who joined the Government Service after January 2005, but, in whose case the recruitment process was conducted prior to January, 2005, in the line of the decision arrived at in the matter by the Central Government. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners has further submitted that the persons similarly situated like the Petitioners, herein, had approached this Court by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 4961/2023. He submits that a Page No.# 9/15 Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 25.11.2024, after examining the issue arising, therein, had allowed the said Writ Petition with a direction to the Respondent authorities to extend the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) under the Rules of 1969 to the Petitioners, therein. He submits that the Petitioners, in the present proceedings, are similarly situated like the Petitioners in WP(C) No. 4961/2023 and accordingly, would be entitled to be extended with the same relief. 5. Mr. R Borpujari, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Finance, Assam, has submitted that the Petitioners, herein, were appointed after 01.02.2005, with the stipulations that they would be covered under the New Pension Scheme (NPS), which had come into being by the time they were so appointed. Accordingly, he submits that the Petitioners, herein, would not be entitled the claim to be covered by the provisions of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) under the Rules of 1969. Accordingly, Mr. R Borpujari, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Finance, Assam, submits that the claims made by the Petitioners in the present Writ Petition, would not mandate an interference from this Court. Page No.# 10/15 6. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. The Petitioners, herein, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 28.12.1996, had submitted their candidature and had participated in the selection process so held. The Petitioners on being successful in the said selection process, their names came to be included in the select list so published on 23.11.1998, by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, South Salmara-Mankachar, Hatsingimari. However, it is found that the Petitioners were not issued with orders appointing them against the post they were so selected, which had required the Petitioners, herein, to approach this Court by way of instituting Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 4608/2006, which was disposed of, vide an order dated 01.04.2008, requiring the Respondent authorities to issue appointment orders, in respect of the Petitioners. The Petitioners were, thereafter, appointed, vide order dated 27.02.2009 and 13.12.2011, as Stipendiary Teachers. However, a stipulation was incorporated in the orders of appointment of the Petitioners, to the effect that they would be covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS) and not by the Page No.# 11/15 existing Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. 8. As noticed, hereinabove, the Petitioners, on completion of their Junior Basic Teachers’ Training (JBT), were authorized their respective scale of pay. However, the Petitioners continued to be governed under the provisions of the New Pension Scheme (NPS). 9. Persons, similarly situated like the Petitioners, belonging to the Morigaon district, who were also appointed after 01.02.2005 and covered under the New Pension Scheme (NPS), had approached this Court by way of filing a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 4961/2023. A coordinate Bench of this Court, on a detailed examination of the issues arising in the matter had proceeded, vide judgment and order dated 25.11.2024, to allow the said Writ Petition by directing the Respondent authorities to extend the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 to the Petitioners, therein. 10. The conclusions drawn by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide the said order dated 25.11.2024, being relevant, is extracted hereinbelow : Page No.# 12/15 “13. Though the respondent Nos.2 and 3 had taken a stand that while the petitioners were appointed in the year 2011, the New Pension Scheme was in force and besides, they have given one undertaking at the time of appointment that they will be governed by the New Pension Scheme and that they have also given an undertaking that they will be governed by the New Pension Scheme and on such count, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 contended that the benefit of old pension scheme cannot be extended to the petitioners, yet the fact remains that while the counterparts of the petitioners in other districts were appointed in the year 1998- 1999 and they were given the benefit of old pension scheme. Besides the advertisement was published in the year 1996, and the selection process was initiated in entire Assam along with the Morigaon district. But the select list for the teachers of Morigaon district was not published for whatever reason, as may be, their appointment was delayed till the year 2011 and the petitioners are no way responsible for the same and the cause of delay cannot be attributable to them. 14. Thus, I find substance in the submission of Mr. Das, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that the right enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India of the petitioners stands violated, and the decision referred by Mr. Das in WP(C) No.7369/2021 also strengthened his contention. 15. It is to be noted here that in the aforementioned writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court, discussing various judgments of Delhi High Court, Allahabad High Court and Uttarakhand High Court, especially the decisions of Delhi High Court in the cases of Shyam Kumar Choudhury & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [WP(C) No.1358/2017] and Union of India & Ors. v. Tanaka Ram & Ors. [WP(C) No.6680/2017], has held that a consistent view of the High Court in these matters is that where the process of recruitment has been initiated in the year 2003 and the examination and selection was completed in the year 2003, merely because the appointment orders were issued subsequently in the year 2004 or later, such delay Page No.# 13/15 not been attributed to the appointees or the recruitees, the benefit of old pension scheme w.e.f. 01.01.2004, cannot be denied to such recruitees/appointees, who have applied for, were duly scrutinized and were declared successful in the year 2003 and it also appears that in the said writ petition, the respondent authorities were directed to extend the benefit of old pension scheme to the petitioners. 16. Though, Mr. Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the respondent No.3 submits that the said decision is per incuriam, in view of the decision of a coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Purnima Hore & Anr. v. State of Assam & Ors. [WP(C) No.6403/2021], yet, the said submission of Mr. Borpujari left this Court unimpressed. It is a fact that in the WP(C) No.7369/2021, the petitioners were governed by the CCS Rules. But, the proposition of law laid down in the aforementioned decision to the considered opinion of this Court, is squarely applicable to the given facts herein this case also. And applying the said proposition of law to the given facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be concluded that the petitioners are also entitled to the benefit of Old Pension Scheme of 1969 Rules. 17. It is a fact that they have given an undertaking that they will be governed by the New Pension Scheme. No doubt, this undertaking was given by them voluntarily but when balanced against their right guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, the same outweighed the embargo of undertaking given by them. By virtue of the advertisement published in Assam in the year 1996 and applying for the posts, the present petitioners also stands in the same footing with their counterpart in other district. While the benefit of Old Pension Scheme was extended to the candidates of other districts, the same cannot be denied to the petitioners on the ground of they being appointed in the year 2011 when the New Pension Scheme came into force, while the cause of delay is not attributable to them. Service jurisprudence evolved by Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time Page No.# 14/15 postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly. [See: State of Karnataka & Ors. v. C. Lalitha, reported in (2006) 2 SCC 747] 18. I have also gone through the other decisions referred by Mr. Das, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and I find that the same also lends credence to his submissions. 19. In the result, I find sufficient merit in this petition and accordingly, the same stands allowed. The impugned order dated 27.07.2023, No.271545/281, stands set aside. 20. By a mandamus of this Court, the respondent authorities, especially respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to extend the benefit of old pension scheme under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 to the petitioners.” 11. On a perusal of the conclusions drawn by the coordinate Bench of this Court, vide the said judgment and order dated 25.11.2024, this Court is in respectful agreement with the same and is of the further view that the said conclusions and directions would also squarely apply in respect of the Petitioners in the present Writ Petition. 12. Accordingly, by following the judgment and order dated 25.11.2024, this Court directs the Respondent authorities to extend to the Petitioners, the benefit under the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), i.e. the benefit flowing from the provisions of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 to the Petitioners, herein. Page No.# 15/15 Orders extending the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) to the Petitioners and the opening of the GPF accounts, in respect of each of them, be so issued by the Respondent authorities, more particularly the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3, within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 13. With the above observations and directions, the present Writ Petition stands allowed. 14. The Parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant