Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010112872025 2026:GAU-AS:3599 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3123/2025 MS BHAGWAN DAS BAGRI AND SONS A HINDU UNDIVIDED FAMILY(HUF), HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT GAUHATI ROLLER FLOUR MILL LTD., G.S ROAD, P.O. AND P.S. DISPUR, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS KARTA SRI BHAGWAN DAS BAGRI SON OF LATE KISTUR CHAND BAGRI RESIDENT OF GAUHHATI FLOUR MILLSLTD, G.S ROAD, P.O AND P.S- DISPUR, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN-781005 VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS DAK BHAWAN, SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI 110001 2:THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL Assam Circle Meghdoot Bhawan Guwahati-1 3:THE POSTMASTER GENERAL Assam Circle Meghdoot Bhawan Guwahati-1 4:THE SENIOR POSTMASTER GENERAL Assam Circle Meghdoot Bhawan Guwahati-1 5:THE DEPUTY POSTMASTER Assam Circle Page No.# 2/6 Meghdoot Bhawan Guwahati-1 6:THE POST MASTER Paltan Bazar Post office Guwahat B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Mishra Advocates for the respondent(s) : Mr. SK Medhi Central Govt. Counsel Date on which Judgment is reserved : NA Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 11.03.2026 Whether the Pronouncement is of the : NA Operative Part of the Judgment Whether the Full Judgment has been : Yes Pronounced JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. RS Mishra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. SK Medhi, the learned CGC, who appears on Page No.# 3/6 behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioners herein which is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) is aggrieved by the actions on the part of the respondents in not paying any interest on the deposit made by the petitioner till 16.12.2024 from the date of opening of the Account. 3. The materials on record show that the petitioner which is a HUF opened an account with the respondent No.6 bearing Account No.0057421285 (Old Account No.230018) with one-time deposit of Rs.30,000/-. The said Account was opened under the National Savings Scheme 1987 and the petitioner was issued a passbook. The said passbook was updated till September, 2010 with a balance amount of Rs.1,92,768/- and thereupon the passbook could not be updated. 4. On 22.12.2023, the petitioner submitted a letter before the respondent No.3 requesting for updating the KYC as well as the passbook. After the submission of the aforesaid letter only the KYC of the petitioner was updated. However, it is alleged that the authorities did not update the passbook nor apprised the petitioner about the maturity amount. Under such circumstances on 30.01.2024, the petitioner submitted various documents for closure of the amount. In pursuance thereto the Office of the respondent No.6 handed over a cheque bearing No.084112 dated 16.12.2024 issued by the respondent No.5 for Rs.1,27,644/- towards maturity of the NSC Account bearing No.0057421285. The petitioner submitted a representation before the respondent Nos.3 and 6 Page No.# 4/6 being aggrieved by the amount disbursed as the petitioner claimed to be entitled for more amount. 5. Pursuant to the said representation, the petitioner also followed it up with a legal notice dated 11.02.2025. In the meantime, the petitioner received a reply dated 24.12.2022 wherein it was informed that the petitioner was not entitled to an interest after 31.12.2005 and accordingly, the said amount of Rs.1,27,644/- was paid after deducting the tax to the tune of Rs.14,183/-. It is under such circumstances, the petitioner being aggrieved has approached this Court by filing the writ petition. 6. This Court had issued a notice on 06.06.2025. In pursuance thereto, an affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the respondents on 06.03.2026. In the said affidavit so filed, the respondents have stated in details as to why the amount to which the petitioner was entitled to was Rs.1,27,644/- and not what the petitioner has claimed. 7. Paragraph 7 of the said affidavit being relevant is reproduced hereinunder: “7. That, with regard 10 the statement made in Paragraph No.4 of the writ petition, the dependent begs to state that since the NSS 1987 scheme was discontinued w.e.f. 01.10.1992, KYC updation is not required and as per Gazette of India Notification dtd 27/07/2005, G.S.R.509(E), 2(ii) (a), interest is only entitled will 31.12.2005. However, payment as admissible under the said Govt. rule, payment was affected vide Cheque No.084112 dated 16.12.2024 for Rs.1,27,6441- (Rupees One Lacs Page No.# 5/6 Twenty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Forty Four only) after deducting TDS (Tax Deducted at Source) for Rs.14,183/-. Details of the principal and interest payment are furnished below :- Principal 30000.00 Interest 111827.00 Total 141827.00 - (TDS) 14183.00 Net Total: 1,27,644/-“ 8. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of Annexure-A to the affidavit-in-opposition. A perusal of Annexure-A shows that the Post Office Savings Account Rules 1981 was amended by the Central Government in exercise of the powers under Section 15 of the Government Savings Bank Act, 1873, which was notified vide the Notification dated 27.07.2005. Sub-Rule(10) to Rule 6 was inserted whereby it was made clear that deposit in an Account other than of a individual Account shall not earn interest after 31.12.2005. 9. Taking into account the said aspect and the justification given by the respondents as to why the petitioner was only entitled to Rs.1,27,644/- as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition which is quoted hereinabove, it is the opinion of this Court that the petitioner being a HUF would not have been entitled to interest beyond 31.12.2005. 10. Accordingly, this Court does not find any ground for interfering with the order dated 24.12.2024 impugned in the instant writ petition and accordingly, Page No.# 6/6 the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant