SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Gau) 860

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
GEETANJALI BAISHYA W/O LATE MANIK CH. BAISHYA – Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 3581 of 2014
Decided On : 07-12-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: R.C. SAIKIA.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1949 – Article, 226 – Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 – Rule 140, 141, 142 – Power of High Court to issue certain writs – Miscreants – Learned counsel for petitioner and Ms R. Bora, learned counsel for respondents authorities Agriculture Department of Government of learned counsel respondents being authorities Finance learned counsel for respondent – Held, Court have taken note of that petitioner had been paid regular family pension delay in payment of family pension would be in respect of difference between special family pension provided to petitioner by order regular family pension that had already been paid respect we take note of pronouncement of Supreme Court rendered in Court had laid down proposition for payment delayed payment of pension – Writ Petition stands partly allowed.

JUDGMENT :

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.

1. Heard Mr. R.C. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms R. Bora, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 5, being the authorities under the Agriculture Department of the Government of Assam. Also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 4, being the authorities under the Finance Department and Mr. R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3, being the Accountant General, Assam.

2. The husband of the petitioner Manik Ch. Baishya who was an Executive Engineer serving in the Head Office of the Agriculture Department of the Government of Assam, while returning home from office at about 6 p.m. on 07.06.2010 in his official vehicle, was abducted by some unknown miscreants. Later on, the dead body of the husband of the petitioner was found lying near the Assam Engineering College at Jalukbari. This writ petition is instituted for a direction to pay the special family pension to the petitioner who is the wife of the deceased employee with a further prayer that an interest @ 18% per annum be also paid for the delay in payment of the pension.

3. Rule 142 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 (for short ‘the Rules of 1969’) provides for a special family pension in the event a Government servant after rendering a minimum of seven years of continuous service dies while in service. Rule 142(i) of the Rules of 1969 provides that for a period of seven years following the date of death or till the date on which the officer would have reached the normal age or superannuation had he remained alive, whichever period is shorter, the pension payable would be at 50% of the basic pay last drawn, subject to a maximum of twice the pension applicable under Rule 141.

4. We have noticed that Rule 142 of the Rules of 1969 provides for an enhanced family pension over and above what is provided under Rule 140 and 141 either for a period of seven years or till the date of superannuation had the officer remained alive, whichever is shorter. Rule 142 of the Rules of 1969 would have to be understood to provide that after the period of seven years or the date of normal superannuation whichever is shorter is over, the family pension under the provisions of Rule 140 and 141 would thereafter be continued. Reference is also made to the Assam Services (Extra Ordinary) Pension Rules, 1963 (for short, the Rules of 1963). In this respect, there is an office memorandum dated 13.03.1989 of the Finance Department of the Government of Assam being EMP/40/85/76 wherein special family pension for State Government employees who died during the discharge of duties or in connection with discharge of duties is provided for. The OM dated 13.03.1989 refers to another OM dated 26.08.1985 which provides for special family pension at the rate of full monthly salary including increments, dearness allowances, and all other allowances as was admissible to the deceased government employee who is killed while engaged in discharge of his duties or for reasons connected with discharge of his duties. The OM dated 13.03.1989 further clarifies that the special family pension would be applicable to the families of the Government servant who died while performing his duties or in connection of his duties amongst others, as a result of attack by extremists, antisocial elements etc.

5. In the instant case, as is already taken note of that the husband of the petitioner was taken away by certain miscreants while returning home from office and on the same date, later on, his dead body was found near the Assam Engineering College. In this writ petition, the petitioner claims for payment of special family pension inasmuch as, according to the petitioner the death of her husband was in connection with discharge of duties. A further relief sought for is that as the family pension has not been given, the petitioner be also paid an interest @ 18% per annum.

6. We are not required to decide the issue as to whether the pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top