O R D E R

28.09.2022 Heard Mr. RB Gohain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P Nayak, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1, 6 and 7 being the authorities under PWRD, Mr. A Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 8 being the authorities in the Finance Department, Mr. CS Hazarika, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondents No. 3 and 4 being the authorities in the Pension and Public Grievances Department and Implementation of Assam Accord Department and Mr. SK MEdhi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 Principal Accountant General, Assam.

2. The husband of the petitioner was appointed as a Section Assistant in the respondent PWD as per the communication of the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam PWD Estt (B) Branch dated 16.06.2001 addressed to the Executive Engineer, PWD, Chariali Road Division in the Sonitpur district. The communication provides that as per the decision of the Government communicated by the Personnel (B) Department as per letter No. ABP.20/89/Pt.II/4 dated 11.07.2000 and on the recommendation of the implementation of Assam Accord Department as per their letter No. IAA.27/2000/23 dated 30.03.2001, the husband of the petitioner Babul Chandra Nath was appointed temporarily and until further orders as Section Assistant in the scale of pay of Rs. 2890-60-3490-90-3670-EB-90-4480-120- 5200-175-5725/- per month plus other allowances as may be admissible. Accordingly, the husband of the petitioner upon being appointed joined his service.

3. Subsequently, by the office Order No. 436 of 2001-02 of the Executive Engineer, PWD, Chariali Division, the husband petitioner who was referred as Work Charge Section Assistant, was transferred and posted in Chariali PWD Roads Division in the Chutia section. Thereafter, by another communication dated 06.06.2003 of the Executive Engineer, PWD Roads, Nagaon East Division made to the Chief Engineer, PWD Roads, Assam under the subject accommodation report, it was provided that there was no regular vacant post of Section Assistant in the Nagaon East Division to accommodate the husband of the petitioner Babul Chandra Nath and accordingly it was proposed that he may be accommodated as a Work Charge Section Assistant.

4. The husband of the petitioner died on 19.08.2020. On his death, the petitioner claims for family pension. On being not paid the family pension, this writ petition is instituted.

5. The respondents have taken a stand that the husband of the petitioner was all along appointed as a Work Charge employee and therefore, he was not in a pensionable service and consequence thereof, the petitioner would be disentitled to family pension.

6. It is noticed that the husband of the petitioner was appointed as per the communication dated 16.06.2001 which firstly provides that there is a decision of the Government of Assam communicated by the Personnel (B) Department as per letter No. ABP.20/89/Pt.II/4 dated 11.07.2000 as well as there is a recommendation by the implementation of the Assam Accord Department as per letter No. IAA.27/2000/23 dated 30.03.2001 and pursuant to such decision, the husband of the petitioner was temporarily appointed until further orders as Section Assistant. The manner in which the husband of the petitioner was appointed does not make it discernible that it was an appointment as a work Charge whereas on the other hand it was an appointment pursuant to the scheme for appointment of next of kin of martyr, victimized families during the Assam agitation. But, however, the subsequent communications referred the husband of the petitioner to be a Work Charge employee, but again the basis upon which the husband of the petitioner is referred as a Work Charge employee is not available on the records produced before the Court.

7. In the circumstance, we direct the Chief Engineer, PWD, Roads, Assam to examine the records pertaining to the service of the husband of the petitioner Babul Chandra Nath and upon examining the records, to p