The right to receive pensionary benefits is constitutional and cannot be denied based on non-regularization of service, particularly after long continuous service, as it violates principles of fairness and justice.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

Heard Mr. D Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N. Sharma, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5, Ms. K. Phukan, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 6, Mr. C. Boruah, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General, appearing for the respondent No.7 and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department.

2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing direction to the respondents to release the following:-

(i) Arrear pension/family pension;

(ii) Provisional Gratuity, along with interest,

(iii) Leave Encashment Benefit, along with interest etc.,

(iv) arrear ACPS w.e.f. 01.01.2011, along with interest acquired there upon (as per revised ROP),

as entitled to by the deceased husband of the petitioner, who had retired from his service on 31.12.2017, as an Inspecting Auditor in the Office of the District Elementary Education Officer, Sivasagar, and died on 29.09.2019.

Background Facts:-

3. The background facts, leading to filing of this present petition, are briefly stated as under:-

“The husband of the petitioner had joined as an Inspecting Auditor on 24.01.1994, in the Office of the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Golaghat, temporarily on ad-hoc basis. His appointment was extended from time to time (by order dated 18.06.1994, 24.03.1995, 04.12.1995) and by order dated 20.03.1997; in which it was reflected that the service of the deceased husband of the petitioner has been extended from 01.03.1996, till posts are filed up in a regular manner.

Lastly, the husband of the petitioner was transferred to the Office of the DEEO, Sivasagar and he retired from his service on 31.12.2017, on superannuation. After retirement, petitioner's husband had filed a representation before the DEEO, Sivasagar on 31.05.2018, for releasing his all retirement benefits. But, the same failed to evoke any response. As the pensionary and other retirement benefits of the petitioner's deceased husband had not been paid, he had instituted a writ proceeding, being W.P.(C) No. 6896/2018, before this Court. Then this Court, vide order dated 26.11.2018, had directed the respondent authorities to release the provisional pension till finalization of monthly regular pension. As the order had not been complied with, one Cont. Case(C) No.248/2019, was also initiated. However, during the pendency of Cont. Case(C) No. 248/2019, the respondent authorities had released a sum of Rs.3,81,138/- as provisional pension w.e.f. January, 2018, up to April, 2019, vide letter dated 24.05.2019. Then the contempt proceeding was closed. But, taking the plea of closing the Cont. Case(C) No. 248/2019, the respondent authorities again stopped the provisional pension without assigning any reason.

Thereafter, the deceased husband of the petitioner had filed an Interlocutory Application vide. I.A.(C) Sl. No.13566/2019, but, before the said interlocutory application was registered and tagged with the W.P.(C) No. 6896/2018, the W.P.(C) No. 6896/2018 was finally heard on 25.09.2019, and vide order dated 25.09.2019, the respondent authorities were directed to release all the admissible retirement benefits and pension to the deceased husband of the petitioner by observing about stoppi