Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010083162026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2521/2026 SRI DIPANKA SARMA AND 5 ORS SON OF LATE DR P C SARMA RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 101 SARMAVILLA BATHAGHULI PANJABARI GUWAHATI 781037 KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 2: SMTI BHANU THAKURIA WIFE OF SARAT CHANDRA THAKURIA RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 24 K K BHATTA PATH HATIGAON DISPUR 781038 GUWAHATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 3: SRI DULESWAR GOGOI SON OF PHATIK CHANDRA GOGOI RESIDENT OF 530 SEPON MILONPUR MAHMORA DISTRICT CHARAIDEO 785673 ASSAM 4: SRI GOBINDA DEKA SON OF LATE PDMA RAM DEKA RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 232 3 NO HASHONG PO MADHUKUSHI DISTRICT KAMRUP R 781354 ASSAM 5: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR DAS SON OF LATE HARI RAM DAS RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 7 A SANJOG PATH BHAGADUTTAPUR KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI KAMRUP METRO 781019 ASSAM 6: SMT LAXMI RONGPI WIFE OF LATE HIREN RONGPI RESIDENT OF KALYANI SAGAR PATH NARAKASUR KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI KAMRUP METRO 781019 ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY Page No.# 2/6 TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE DIRECTOR OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS GOVT OF ASSAM DIPUR GUWAHATI 06 ASSAM 4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 5:JYOTI CHITRABAN FILM STUDIO SOCIETY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 19 6:THE SECRETARY JYOTI CHITRABAN FILM STUDIO SOCIETY KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D M NATH, MR G RAHUL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA JUDGMENT 15.05.2026 Heard Mr. G Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. S Baruah, learned State Counsel, Assam and Ms. A Borthakur, learned counsel for the Finance Department. 2. Learned State Counsel submits that she does not have any objection if this writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the Order dated 05.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.3680/2025 as well as Judgment and Order dated 14.09.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other Page No.# 3/6 connected writ petitions. 3. The petitioners no.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 and the petitioner no.6, being the widow of retired employee, are before this Court being aggrieved by non-payment of their due retiral benefits/gratuity to which they are entitled to on their retirement from the Office of Jyoti Chitraban (Film Studio) Society, Kahilipara i.e. the respondent no.5. 4. The petitioners were employed in the Jyoti Chitraban Society. The said Society was established by the State in the year 1961 for production of the films of the region and was registered bearing Registration No. 59/1973-74. It is the contention of the petitioners that the Society is fully financed and controlled by the Government of Assam. The petitioners have contended that after their retirement, they were not paid their gratuity and in this regard they filed a representation before the respondent No. 6 on 16.02.2026. The petitioners lay the foundations of their claim on Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the Statute holding the field namely, the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. 5. By referring to an order dated 05.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.3680/2025 and Judgment and Order dated 14.09.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions, the Page No.# 4/6 learned counsel petitioners submits that similarly situated employees of Jyoti Chitraban (Film Studio) Society had preferred the aforementioned writ petitions before this Court and they were granted the benefit by this Court and thereafter, the authorities had also paid the same to them, and under such circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that similar relief may be granted to the present petitioners who are also similarly situated with the petitioners of WP(C) No.3680/2025 and WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other writ petitions, and this petition may be allowed. 6. Ms. S Baruah, learned State Counsel submits that she has no objection in the event of granting similar relief to the present petitioners as granted to the petitioners of WP(C) No.3680/2025 and WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions. 7. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the pleadings available on record as well as the documents and also perusal of the order dated 05.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.3680/2025 and Judgment and Order dated 14.09.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions, it is seen that this Court had directed the respondent authorities in WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions to release the gratuity to the petitioners Page No.# 5/6 therein. The relevant paragraphs of the Judgment and Order dated 14.09.2023 passed in WP(C) No.6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions, this Court has held as under: “21. Gratuity is a retirement benefit for the long services rendered by an employee and as a provision for old age which is a statutory right under the Act. The said right cannot be taken away except in accordance with the provisions of the Act. It is considered as deferred payments earned by an employee during his lifetime of service and protected under the social welfare concept enshrined in the Constitution of India. 22. The subsequent question / issue which will arise is with regard to lack of funds of the State Government to pay the Gratuity. The entitlement to gratuity being a statutory entitlement, the ground of lack of funds cannot be held to be a cogent ground and therefore it is the duty and reasonability of the State Government as a whole to allot adequate funds to clear the gratuity to the petitioners. 23. This Court has also taken note of the case laws relied upon by the petitioners wherein indications have been made that in matters of payment of gratuity, the State would have to take the responsibility. 24. In this connection, one may gainfully refer to the case of IUF Workers’ Assn. v. Union of India reported in (2018) 8 SCC 201. In that case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was dealing with a similar situation where in various the tea estates in the States of Assam, Kerala etc. were abandoned by the tea companies and the workers were left high and dry and were living in pitiable conditions as they did not receive their dues. Under such circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed the Central Government to carry out their statutory duties under the provisions of the Tea Act with some conditions. 25. In view of the above, both these writ petitions stand allowed holding that the petitioners are entitled to gratuity. Since, the pleaded case of the respondents is Page No.# 6/6 lack of funds, this Court directs the State Government to make adequate funds available to the Society to make the payment of gratuity to the petitioners. Since the claim is a long pending one, the said funds are to be made available within an outer limit of 90 days from today and the gratuity be paid to the petitioners as per their entitlements after due verification.” 9. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the present petitioners were also the employees of Jyoti Chitraban (Film Studio) Society. The petitioners no. 1 to 5 and the late husband of the petitioner no.6 had retired from service and have not been granted the gratuity, which they are entitled to after their superannuation. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by granting similar relief to the present petitioners as granted to the petitioners of WP(C) No.3680/2025 as well as WP(C) No. 6546/2010 and other connected writ petitions. 10. It is provided that gratuity shall be paid to the present petitioners within a period 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order after proper verification and if there is any shortage of fund, the respondents shall make available necessary funds for payment of gratuity to the petitioners. 11. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant