Page No.# 1/5 GAHC020005132023 2026:GAU-NL:16 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : Review.Pet./4/2023 SMTI. S. CHONGJI PHOM W/O LATE KONGPA PHOM, PONGCHING VILLAGE, LONGLENG 798625, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 9 ORS THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND, KOHIMA 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND PERSONNEL AND ADMINSITRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT NAGALAND KOHIMA 3:THE HOME COMMISSIONER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND DEPARTMENT OF HOME NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY JUSTICE AND LAW DEPARTMENT Page No.# 2/5 NAGALAND KOHIMA 5:THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND NAGALAND KOHIMA 6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NAGALAND KOHIMA 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TUENSANG NAGALAND 8:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE LONGLENG NAGALAND 9:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL NAGALAND KOHIMA 10:THE TREASURY OFFICER LONGLENG NAGALAN Advocate for the Petitioner : I. IMTI LONGCHAR, OBANGNENLA LONGCHAR,VIKHONO KISO,R ATSULA KIPS,SUPONGWATI WALLING Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG O R D E R 27.01.2026 Heard Mr. I. Imti Longchar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. N. Angami, learned Senior Government Advocate for the State Page No.# 3/5 respondent Nos. 1 to 8 and 10, and Mr. N. Mozhui, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 9/Accountant General. 2. Mr. I. Imti Longchar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant review petition filed under Section 114 read with Order 47, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Chapter X of the Gauhati High Court Rules is for the review of this Court’s Judgment dated 28.04.2023, passed in WP(C)/61/2019. The learned counsel submits that this Court, in its judgment dated 28.04.2023, had erred in observing that the petitioner, on the demise of her husband, Shri Kongpa Phom (Late), was not entitled to any extraordinary pension. He submits that on the reading of Rule 2 of the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 it is clearly mentioned that persons having “fixed pay” are to be considered for payment of extraordinary pension under certain circumstances which have been highlighted in the said Rules. The learned counsel submits that the deceased husband of the petitioner, Late Kongpa Phom was appointed as a Constable/Driver on contingency basis on fixed pay of Rs. 450/- (Rupees Four Hundred and Fifty) per month vide Office Order dated 10.05.2001 and the services of the petitioner’s late husband was extended vide Order dated 05.11.2001 for another period of 3 (three) months. However, on 30.11.2001, the petitioner’s husband met with a fatal accident while performing his duty. The learned counsel submits that considering the above facts and circumstances under which the late husband of the petitioner died, the petitioner is entitled to payment of pension of her deceased husband under the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939. He submitted that the judgment of this Court dated 28.04.2023 in WP(C)/61/2019 may therefore, be Page No.# 4/5 reviewed and altered by granting the petitioner the extraordinary pension of her deceased husband. 3. Per contra, Mr. N. Mozhui, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 9/Accountant General submits that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)/202(K)/2015 dated 25.05.2017 had taken into consideration the submission made by the Government Advocate that the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 is not applicable to the State of Nagaland and that the State Government had a separate Scheme of awarding extraordinary pension to the regular Government employees vide Office Memorandum dated 06.06.1995. He submitted that this Court in its judgment dated 28.04.2023 in WP(C)/61/2019 had also taken the same view that the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 is not applicable in the State of Nagaland. He, therefore, submitted that since there was no appeal preferred against the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)/202(K)/2015 dated 25.05.2017, it has attained its finality and therefore, the same view taken by this Court in WP(C)/61/2019 cannot be questioned at this stage. The learned Standing Counsel, thus, submits that in view of the above, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is baseless and should be dismissed outright. 4. Mr. N. Angami, learned Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents submits that he will be adopting the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 9 and submits that the review petition is liable to be set aside since it is not a disputed fact that the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 is not applicable in the State of Nagaland. Page No.# 5/5 5. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties, this Court finds that the learned counsel for the review petitioner has not been able to substantiate his claim that the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 is actually applicable in the State of Nagaland and therefore, no grounds or reasons have been made out to alter or reconsider the findings of this Court in WP(C)/61/2019 dated 28.04.2023. 6. In view of the above reasons, this Court finds that there is no need to alter this Court’s decision dated 28.04.2023 and accordingly, the instant Review Pet. 4/2023 stands dismissed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant