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) 14641

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
KUNJA HAZARIKA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS – Respondent
WP(C) 4211 / 2024



GAHC010166312024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/4211/2024 KUNJA HAZARIKA W/O- LATE BHOLA HAZARIKA @ BHULA HAZARIKA @ BHOLA NATH HAZARIKA, R/O- VILL- SARUCHARAI GHARPHALIA, P.S.- JORHAT, PO-

DHEKORGORAH, DIST- JORHAT (ASSAM), PIN- 785015 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

2:THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

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

4:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PANJABARI JURIPAR GUWAHATI-37

5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX GUWAHATI-6

6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JORHAT ZILLA PARISHAD JORHAT DIST.- JORHAT (ASSAM)

PIN- 785001

7:THE TREASURY OFFICER JORHAT TREASURY JORHAT DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 78500 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI, MS. D. DEVI,MS K BARMAN,MS CHITRALEKHA DAS Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., SC, FINANCE DEPTT.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

ORDER

Date : 27-04-2026 Heard Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.K. Ghosh, learned standing counsel, P&RD Department, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 4 & 6, Mr. A. Chaliha, learned standing counsel, Finance Department, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 3 & 7 and Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 5.

2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition has prayed for finalization of the lifetime pension arrears of her husband, viz. Bhola Hazarika @ Bhula Hazarika @ Bhola Nath Hazarika and also authorizing to her due family pension and pensionary benefits on account of the services rendered by her husband. The husband of the petitioner was initially engaged as Office Assistant at Rajahowli Gaon Panchayat under Jorhat Zilla Parishad and he had joined his services on 01-02-1956. The services of the petitioner’s husband was subsequently regularized w.e.f. 01-01-1981. On the Assam Panchayat Employees (Provincialisation) Act, 1999 coming into force w.e.f. 01-10-1991, the services of the husband of the petitioner was provincialized. The husband of the petitioner had retired from his service on 30-04-1994. However, the pension and pensionary benefits of the husband of the petitioner was not sanctioned and he died on 31-01-2019 on account of old age ailments. It is projected in the writ petition that the petitioner had approached the respondent authorities for being authorized her pension and pensionary benefits, however, the same not being authorized to her, she has instituted the present writ petition praying for the reliefs noticed, hereinabove.

3. Mr. A.K. Ghosh, learned standing counsel, P&RD Department, Assam has submitted that a pension proposal in respect of the husband of the petitioner was so prepared by the Chief Executive Officer, Jorhat Zilla Parishad in the year 2017. However, the same was returned by the Director of Pension holding that the petitioner’s husband had not completed 20 years of regular service and was accordingly, not entitled for being authorized pension and other pensionary benefits. The name of the husband of the petitioner was also not found to be included in the list of 423 provincialised panchayat employees who had retired from their services on completion of more than 10 years of service but less than 20 years of service. Accordingly, the pension proposal in respect of the husband of the petitioner could not be further processed. It is projected that the petitioner’s husband not having completed 20 years of service, he does not have the requisite qualifying service for being authorized pension and pensionary benefits.

4. It was further projected by the respondents that late Bhola Hazarika @ Bhula Hazarika @

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