IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SUMAN SHYAM, J.
Azizur Rahman S/o- Late Abdur Rezzaque - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And 3 Ors - Respondents
WP(C) 4821 of 2023
Decided on : 23-06-2025.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right to pension under assam services rules. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of the petitioner's service history. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. claim for pension based on prior government service. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. assessment of relevant facts. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. interpretation of section 22(2)(ii) of the act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. pension eligibility criteria based on service status. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 8. explanation of conditions for pension qualification. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 9. duration and conditions impacting pension rights. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 10. timeliness and limitations on pension claims. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 11. rejection of arguments regarding service permanence. (Para 31 , 32) |
| 12. final ruling on the petition. (Para 33) |
JUDGMENT :
SUMAN SHYAM, J.
1. Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondent no.1; Mr. S. P. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Board, appearing for the respondent nos. 2 & 3 and Mr. D. Bhattacharjya, learned Standing Counsel, Office of the AG (A&E) Assam, appearing for the respondent no. 4.
2. The core question arising for decision of this Court in the present writ petition is as to whether, the writ petitioner would be entitled to the benefits of pension payable under Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 despite his permanent absorption under section 22 (2)(ii) of the Assam Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Board Act, 1985 in the service of the Board with effect from 25/07/1996 ?
3. As per the projections made in the writ petition, it appears that pursuant to a selection process held by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) and the recommendation made thereto by the communication dated 07/07/1987, the petitioner was temporarily appointed as Assistant Engineer (Civil) under the Directorate of Municipal Administration, Assam, in the pay scale of Rs. 875- 40-1075-EB-40-1275-EB-45-1500-50-1850/- per month and other allowances as admissible under the Rules. The appointment so made by the order dated 05/07/1988 was to take effect from the date of joining in service. Accordingly, the petitioner had joined service as Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Directorate of Municipal Administration, Assam. While he was serving as Assistant Engineer (Civil) under the Municipal Administration Department (MAD), by invoking the powers under section 8 of the Assam Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1985 (here in after referred to as the Act of 1985), the service of the petitioner, as Assistant Engineer (Civil), was also placed at the disposal of the Assam Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Board (herein after referred to as the ‘Board’), Guwahati, on part time basis, by issuing the notification dated 10/07/1989. In the said notification, it was, clearly mentioned that the part time assignment of duties of the petitioner at the disposal of the Board would be in addition to his own duties as Assistant Engineer (Civil) of MAD.
4. In terms of the notification dated 10/07/1989, the petitioner went on to discharge his duties as Assistant Engineer under the Board on part time basis with effect from 03/07/1989 till 09/04/1990. However, during this period, he continued to draw his salary from the Directorate of Municipal Administration. On 10/04/1990, the petitioner was sent on deputation to serve under the Board and he remained on deputation till 14/12/1995. As such, with effect from 10/04/1990, the petitioner was allowed to draw deputation allowance up to 14/12/1995. While the writ petitioner was on deputation, a decision was taken in the 18th meeting of the Board of Directors of the Board, held on 17/11/1995, to permanently absorb the petitioner in the services of the Board. Accordingly, by the communication dated 12/07/1996 issued by the Mana
AI
Absence of prior permanent status disqualifies entitlement to pension under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, despite permanent absorption in a non-pensionable establishment.
Pension eligibility is contingent upon completing 5 years of continuous service before a specified date, as per relevant government circulars.
The court upheld that a petitioner’s past service could be counted towards pension benefits under the CCS (Pension) Rules where explicit conditions of absorption allowed for such recognition.
Continuous service and regularization can establish entitlement to pension, overriding initial non-permanent employment status.
The court affirmed that an employee appointed before the New Pension Scheme is entitled to benefits under the Old Pension Scheme, regardless of any undertaking given under duress.
Point of Law : Disqualification under Rule 31 of the 1969 Pension Rules would not be applicable to the case of the petitioner.
A petitioner is not entitled to pension as his accumulated service does not meet the required 10 years qualifying service, reaffirming the pension rules limiting recognition of temporary service to 5....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.