Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010235232015 2026:GAU-AS:7446 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2104/2015 SMTI. KANAN BARDALAI W/O- LT. KHAGENDRA NATH BARDALAI, R/O- HOUSE NO. 41, PENSIONPARA ROAD, GHY- 3, DIST.- KAMRUP M, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 4 ORS, REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SCERT ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19. 3:THE MANGALDOI GOVT. TEACHER TRAINING COLLEGE MANGALDOI ASSAM REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL. 4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A and E MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GHY- 29 DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM. 5:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. OF PENSION DEPTT. OF PENSIONS AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES GOVT. OF ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA GHY- 6 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S CHOUDHURY, MR.K KALITA,MR.A SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PENSIONR5, SC, AG(R4),SC, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION(R1&2) Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 26.05.2026 Heard Mr K Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms S Chutia, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department and Mr S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of SCERT. 2. By this application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for counting her past services prior to the provincialization of the College or regularization of her service for providing her pensionary benefits by relaxing Rule 31 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as a Principal of Mangaldoi Government Teacher Training College, Mangaldoi (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘Mangaldoi College’), vide order dated 25.04.1974, w.e.f. 01.05.1974. Thereafter, vide order dated 11th of September, 1998, the college, where she was appointed as a Principal was provincialized w.e.f. 27.02.1998. The petitioner states that she had retired by then, more particularly, she retired on 30.05.1997. It is stipulated in the said provincialization order that the past services of the Principal and Lecturer shall be counted as qualifying services for the purpose of pension and in the said notification, 7 (seven) Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff were mentioned. Thereafter, on 3rd of September, 2001, a letter was written by the Director, SCERT to the Commissioner and Page No.# 3/5 Secretary, Education Department, by which it was observed that the petitioner who was the founder Principal of the Mangaldoi College, will be entitled for pensionary benefits only if the College is taken over w.e.f. 01.05.1996. it was also intimated that if the taking over of the College was done from a retrospective date, i.e., from 01.05.1996, then an additional amount would be required. Pursuant to the said letter, a notification was issued on 7th of march, 2005, wherein the Governor of Assam is stated to have accorded approval for taking over the said College w.e.f. 01.05.1996, i.e., from the date of the Cabinet decision. In view of the said notification, the services of the petitioner was regularized as ex-Principal of the College, w.e.f. 01.05.1996, and that, thereafter, the pension process had started and the Principal issued a letter to the office of the Accountant General, but the same could not be processed in view of the lack of minimum service required for pensionary benefits. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case of similarly situated teachers, the services were regularized from an earlier date for pensionary benefits. He submits that steps were taken for taking over the College from a retrospective date only for the benefit of the petitioner so that she gets the pensionary benefits, she being the founder of the said college, as reflected in the letter dated 3rd of September, 2001, but due to lack of minimum service required, the petitioner could not be given the pensionary benefits. 5. On the other hand, Mr S Bora, the learned counsel for the SCERT, by relying on the Page No.# 4/5 affidavits, submits that the petitioner had only 1 (one) year 2 months’ continuous service after her regularization, and as such, she is not entitled for the pensionary benefits. It is also stated that the petitioner was not the founder Principal of the Mangaldoi College, as claimed by the petitioner as she has been appointed as a Principal by the Secretary only, when the College was at the venture stage and not taken over by the Government. It is also stated that when the Mangaldoi College was provincialized, the petitioner had already retired by then, and that although the petitioner’s services had been regularized w.e.f. 01.05.1996, yet she is not entitled for the pensionary benefits. 6. As far as the contentions of the said respondents are concerned, the same is not incorrect in view of the fact that the petitioner’s service was regularized from 01.05.1996, i.e., the date when the College was taken over by the Government of Assam. However, by applying to the said date, the petitioner does not become eligible for the pension in view of Rule 31 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, wherein it is provided that minimum of 10 years’ qualifying service is required. However, it should not be lost sight of the fact that the Director of SCERT, by letter dated 3rd of September, 2001, had communicated to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Elementary Education Department, that the petitioner was the founder Principal of the Mangaldoi College, although according to the respondents, it was a venture school then, and for according her pensionary benefits, the taking over date of the College by the Government was recommended to be from a retrospective date, i.e., Page No.# 5/5 01.05.1996, and in pursuance of that letter, the taking over was done w.e.f. 01.05.1996. However, even after the said retrospective date fixed, the petitioner could not be given the pensionary benefits due to lack of length of service. It is also seen that in respect of another lecturer, who had also retired after provincialization, the regularization of her service was done w.e.f. 21.11.1983, and as such, she became eligible for receipt of the pensionary benefits. Further, the judgment placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner rendered by this Court in Writ Appeal No. 73/2019, on similar facts, held that the appellant in the said case, had rendered his services for 24 years as Sub-Registrar on commission basis and the same was directed to be accounted for the purpose of accommodation of his pensionable service and for consequential benefits. As such, this Court deems it fit to direct the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of School Education, to consider by taking into account, the past services rendered by the petitioner as a Principal of Mangaldoi College from the date of her appointment w.e.f. 01.05.1974, till the date of her retirement or any other period of service and consequently, allow the petitioner, her pension and pensionary benefits. It is further directed that the concerned authority would consider the case within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the order. 7. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant