SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 5619

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
SABITRI DAS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. – Respondent
WP(C) / 2583 / 2025



GAHC010099522025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/2583/2025 SABITRI DAS W/O- LATE JOGENDRA DAS, R/O- VILL- MANGALADAI, P.O.AND P.S. MANGALDAI DIST- DARANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

REP BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

5:THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22.

6:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)

ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI-29.

7:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (AGRICULTURE)

MANGALDAI DIVISION MANGALDAI DIST. DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784125

8:THE TREASURY OFFICER MANGALDAI TREASURY MANGALDAI DIST. DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78412 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI, MS. D. DEVI,MS CHITRALEKHA DAS Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AGRI. DEPARTMENT, MR. S K MEDHI(SC,AG (A AND E)),SC, AG,SC, FINANCE DEPTT.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

ORDER

Date : 09-02-2026 Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R. Bora, learned standing counsel, Agriculture Department, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 4 & 6, Mr. R. Dhar, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent No. 2, Mr. P. Nayak, learned Addl. A.G. Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 3 & 7 and Ms. A. Sarma, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel representing respondent No. 5.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present writ petition, has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for authorizing her family pension in respect of the services rendered by her husband late Jogendra Das as Muster Roll Employee in the establishment of the Executive Engineer (Agriculture), Mangaldoi Division, Mangaldoi, i.e. the respondent No. 6, herein. As projected in the writ petition, the husband of the petitioner late Jogendra Das was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker w.e.f. 04-10-1992 in the establishment of the respondent No. 6. The petitioner’s husband having been found to have satisfied the criteria for regularization of his services, the name of the husband of the petitioner was included in the proposal so submitted by the respondent authorities for regularization of services of Muster Roll Workers. In pursuance to the approval granted by the Government in this connection, the services of the husband of the petitioner was regularized w.e.f. 22-07-2005 vide order dated 05-10-2005. The Directorate of Agriculture, Assam, i.e. the respondent No. 4 vide communication dated 02-03-2006 informed all concerned that the regularization of the services of the Muster Roll Workers would be effective w.e.f. 22-07-2005. Although the services of the husband of the petitioner was regularized w.e.f. 22-07-2005, unfortunately he passed away on 16-09-2005. The death of the husband of the petitioner having occasioned before issuance of the order dated 05-10-2005 although his services was regularized w.e.f.

22-07-2005, the same was not given effect to.

3. The petitioner being aggrieved had approached the respondent authorities on several occasions praying for authorizing to her family pension by treating the services of her husband to have been so regularized w.e.f. 22-07-2005. The said prayer of the petitioner not having been considered by the respondent authorities, she has instituted the present writ petition.

4. Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner was admittedly being engaged as Muster Roll Worker w.e.f. 04-10-1992, his case was covered by the policy decision as arrived at in the year 2005 by the Govt. of Assam for regularization of services

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top