SWARNAMAI SARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was originally filed by the husband of the deceased, who died on 1-12-2006 during the pendency of the writ petition, and was thereafter substituted by the present petitioner vide the order dated 30-11-2007 passed by this Court in Misc. Case No. 4121 of 2007. The interesting question of law raised in this writ petition is whether the period of absence of the deceased from 14-10-1973 to 3-5-1990, which was subsequently regularized by the respondent authorities by treating such period as "Dies Non", can be counted for the purpose of pension benefit?

(2.) The controversy arose on the following facts and circumstances: The deceased joined the post of Forest Guard on 1-5-1956 at the Office of the Forest Range Officer, Lumding and was continuing in that post in that capacity till 1973 by drawing his salaries. However, he had to remain absent from between 14-1-1973 and 3-5-1990 due to mental illness. After his recovery from the illness, he approached the respondent authorities for work. The respondent No. 4 again appointed him as Gate Chowkidar on 24-1-1985. Subsequently, he was appointed as Forest Guard with effect from 2-5-1990; his service was eventually confirmed on 1-12-1995. The deceased retired from service on 31-3-1996 on attaining the age of superannuation. The respondent authorities thereafter counted the total period of his service i.e. from the date of his second appointment as 2-5-1990 to the date of his superannuation as 31-1-1996 to be five years, ten months and twenty-nine days. He, therefore, received a sum of Rs.2,227/- as his monthly pension, which was fixed on the basis of his service for the period between 2-5-1990 and 31-1-1996. It would appear that the period of absence from duty from 14-1-1973 to 3-5-1990 was subsequently regularized by the respondents by treating such period as "Dies non" to bridge the gap between previous service and existing service without giving the benefit of pay, increment, leave, pension to the deceased for that period. The deceased made representation to the respondents to count the said period of his absence without leave for the purpose of pension, but the same proved futile. This prompted him to file this writ petition for appropriate relief.

(3.) The writ petition is contested by the respondent authorities by filing their affidavit-in-opposition. The case of the answering respondents is that the total period of qualifying service for entitlement of pension under the Assam Pension Rules, 1968 is 20 years. The deceased was admittedly appointed as Forest Guard on 1-5-1956, but he was found absent from duty without leave for the period indicated in the writ petition; due to his unauthorised absence, he was not in service in that period. It is, therefore, submitted that the deceased has failed to make out any case for invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.