Compassionate allowance may be granted even after a delay, provided special circumstances are evaluated and considered by authorities per the applicable pension rules.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. R. Majumdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. J.K. Goswami, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. None appears on behalf of the Accountant General (A & E) when the matter is called.

2. The Petitioner herein has filed the instant writ petition seeking a direction upon the Respondents to grant the Petitioner compassionate allowance and compassionate gratuity which her husband would have been entitled to had he been alive and in that regard, had submitted a representation dated 30.03.2024. It is the further case of the Petitioner that the said representation dated 30.03.2024 was not considered and it is under such circumstances, the Petitioner has approached this Court.

3. The brief facts of the instant case as would appear from the materials on record is that the husband of the Petitioner one Kailash Chandra Barman (since deceased) was appointed as AB Constable w.e.f. 01.11.1990. During his lifetime, a Departmental Proceedings was initiated against the husband of the Petitioner which was registered as Departmental Proceeding No.12/2002 on the ground of his unauthorized absence from police reserve Bongaigaon w.e.f. 17.02.2002 to 21.04.2002 and further from 29.05.2002 to19.10.2002.

4. An enquiry was conducted and the charges which were leveled against the husband of the Petitioner were held to be proved beyond doubt. Resultantly, the husband of the Petitioner was removed from service vide an order dated 19.10.2002. It appears from the very order dated 19.10.2002 that post the enquiry being carried out, opportunity was given to the husband of the Petitioner by issuance of Show Cause Notice but the husband of the Petitioner thereupon did not submit any reply. Be that as it may, the husband of the Petitioner expired on 14.04.2009 leaving behind the Petitioner and his children. The Petitioner thereupon submitted a representation on 03.03.2011 stating inter alia that her husband was terminated from service on 19.10.2002 and that her husband expired on14.04.2009 and therefore, she be paid the family pension at the earliest.

5. It is seen that the Petitioner thereupon submitted various representations. However, those representations did not find any favour. The Petitioner thereupon learnt that taking into account that the husband was terminated, her husband would not be entitled to any pension and under such circumstances, submitted an appeal to the Inspector General of Police (Administration) dated 30.03.2024 claiming compassionate allowance in terms with Rule 24 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 (for short ‘the Rules of 1969’). The said representation/appeal was pending and under such circumstances, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.

6. The materials on record would show that this Court issued notice on 12.06.2024. Thereupon, an affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the Respondent No.4 stating inter alia why the husband of the Petitioner was removed from service and there was no medical documents submitted by the husband of the Petitioner during his lifetime. It was also mentioned that the Petitioner was not entitled to any benefits in view of the Rule 24 of the Rules of 1969. A reply there-against was filed by the Petitioner.

7. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr. J.K. Goswami, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 has placed before this Court a communication dated 01.11.2025 issued to the Additional Senior Government Advocate by the Assistant Inspector General of Police (Law) stating