The court affirmed that the provisions for family pensions apply retroactively to deceased employees if conditions are fulfilled, reflecting principles of equity and social justice.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Mazumdar, J.

1.Heard Ms P. Barman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department, and Mr P.J. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4. Mr R.K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General, appears for the respondent No.5.

2.By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the Communication dated 03.03.2023 issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of Higher Education, by which the application of the petitioner for the grant of family pension for the services rendered by her late husband as Lecturer has been declined. It is the case of the petitioner that family pension is admissible to her under the relevant provisions of the Assam College Employees (Provincialization) Act, 2005, which has been amended by the Assam College Employees (Provincialization) (Amendment) Act, 2012, and the Assam College Employees (Provincialization) (Amendment) Act, 2020.

3.This Court has heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and also gone through the various undisputed records annexed to the writ petition. The relevant provisions of law applicable to the case have also been perused, and the precedents, which would have a bearing on the outcome of the case, have been duly considered.

4. The husband of the petitioner was a professor of the Debraj Roy College at Golaghat who joined as a lecturer of Botany on 30 October 1963. After serving the college for a period of 23 years, the husband of the petitioner had applied for voluntary retirement in the year 1987, and the governing body of the college approved his request for voluntary retirement on 17.02.1987. The husband of the petitioner met his demise on the fifth of January 2008.

5.The provisions of the Assam College Employees (Provincialisation) Act, 2005, to provide for the provincialisation of the services of employees of the Non-Government Colleges in receipt of deficit grants-in-aid in the State of Assam came into force on the 1st day of December, 2005. As per the provisions of Section 3 of the Act of 2005, subject to the provisions of Article 30 and 309 of the Constitution of India, all employees of the Non-Government Colleges in Assam in receipt of deficit grants-in-aid from the Government and imparting general education in Arts, Commerce or Science stream in Graduate level, save and except the employees who exercised option to continue in the existing terms and conditions of service under clause (d) of , were deemed to have become the employees of the Government on and from the date on which the Colleges have been brought under the deficit system of grants-in-aid, on the terms and conditions laid down in the clauses that followed in the same section.

6.There is no qualm at the bar that, as per the aforesaid provisions, the husband of the petitioner was an “employee” of such a college. The definition of “employee” is available at Section 2 (b) as “an employee of a College, both teaching and non-teaching, appointed substantively against a sanctioned post”. The husband of the petitioner had already retired from his services by the time the Act of 2005 came into force. He was therefore not included in the definition of “existing employee”, which is found at Section 2(c), to mean an employee of a College, both teaching and non-teaching, appointed substantively against a sanctioned post and who is or has been in service on or after the 1st day of January, 2005.

7. Section 8