LAWS(GAU)-2022-12-102

KANIKA DEKA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On December 19, 2022
Kanika Deka Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. C Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. D Gogoi, learned counsel for the resepondents No. 1, 2 and 4 being the authorities in the PHED, Mr. A Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 being the authority in the Finance Department and Ms. S Barua, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 being the authority in the Pension and Public Grievance Department.

(2.) The petitioner No. 1 is the wife and the petitioners No. 2 and 3 are the daughters of Balabhadra Deka, who was working as a Khalasi in the respondent PHED Department. On 11/9/2020 Balabhadra Deka was entrusted the duty of working in the Panbazar Water Supply Scheme (in short PWSS). While performing his duty, the employee Balabhadra Deka went missing and in this respect Suwalkuchi River PS UD Case No. 15/2020 was registered on the information being lodged by Kumud Deka being the brother of Balabhadra Deka. As the person concerned was missing while working over the river Brahmaputra, the investigation was also made by the Pandu river police out post resulting in Pandu RPOP GD No. 171 dtd. 11/9/2020 and 185 dtd. 12/9/2020. In this respect, there is a report submitted by the in-charge of Pandu RPOP dtd. 18/11/2020 which is available as Annexure-G page 26 to the writ petition. The report dtd. 18/11/2020 is extracted as below:-

(3.) A reading of the aforesaid report makes it discernible that the employee Balabhadra Deka while he was working on a barge in course of his duty in the PWSS is suspected to have fallen in the river Brahmaputra. The river police had made all the efforts to trace out the disappeared husband of the petitioner No. 1, but were unsuccessful and accordingly it is a report of the river police that Bala-bhadra Deka is presumed to have drowned in the river Brahmaputra while working on the barge. The report of the river police dtd. 18/11/2020 makes it implicit and unambiguous that the husband of the petitioner No. 1 disappeared while he was performing his duty for the respondent authorities. In the circumstance, the wife and the daughters of the disappeared employee Balabhadra Deka instituted this writ petition claiming family pension.