SYBANNESA KHATUN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the refusal of the State-respondents to pay pension to the deceased pensioner, this writ petition had been initially filed by the pensioner himself, and is now continued by his wife as his legal heir after his death. Late Md. Lutfur Rahman, who died on 13.3.2012 during the pendency of this writ petition, was appointed as Arabic Teacher of Digendra Nath M.E. School on 1.4.1975 to cater to the needs of the locality. The deceased also claimed to be the founder teacher of the School. The School got ad-hoc grant on 1.10.1977, and was provincialised by the Government of Assam on 23.2.1980: his name got dropped at the time of the provincialisation. Aggrieved by that, he had at one time approached this Court through the Classical (Arabic) Teachers Association, Karimganj in Civil Rule No. 1677 of 1990 for regularization of his service and that of his colleagues. This Court disposed of the writ petition on 24.1.1994 by directing the authority to consider the case of the petitioner-Association, among others, for regularization of the services of members of their Association including that of the petitioner. In compliance with the order of this Court, the respondent authorities regularized the service of the petitioner vide the order dated 3.8.1999 issued by the respondent No. 1 with immediate effect. The respondent No. 4 thereafter by the order dated 5.11.1999 adjusted the service of the petitioner against the vacant post of Arabic Teacher at Kanishail M.E. Madrassa on a regular pay scale and other allowances. He was thereafter released from Digendra Nath ME School, and joined Kanishail M.E. Madrassa on 6.11.1999 till 31.8.2004 when he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation.

(2.) Immediately after regularization of his service, the petitioner on 16.10.2000 filed a representation to the respondent No. 4 for regularization of his dropped period with effect from 23.2.1980 i.e. the date of provincialization of the school with supernumery approval to the post of Arabic Teacher for enabling him to receive pension benefits and for his adjustment against regular vacant post His representation was never accepted till the date of his retirement. Therefore, by the time he had retired from service on 31.8.2004, he hardly had five years of regular service. As he did not have the qualifying service of ten years, the application of the petitioner for pension benefits was rejected by the respondent authorities. Having foiled to convince the State-respondents for retrospective regularization of his dropped period even after repeated representations made by him, this writ petition is now filed by the petitioner for appropriate orders.

(3.) The writ petition is opposed by the State-respondents, who have also filed their affidavit-in-opposition through the respondent No. 2 (the Director of Elementary Education, Assam). The stance taken by the respondent authorities is that the School received ad-hoc grant w.e.f. 1.10.1977 and was provincialized w.e.f. 28.2.1980 and that at the time of the provincialization, the post of Arabic Teacher was not sanctioned whereupon the name of the petitioner had to be, and was dropped. However, in compliance with the order of this Court in CR No. 1577 of 1990, the District Elementary Education Officer, Karimganj, in pursuance of the letter dated 3.8.1999 issued by the Government, had adjusted the honorary service of the petitioner against a vacant post of Arabic Teacher at Kanishail ME Madrassa w.e.f. 6.11.1999 i.e. from the date of joining the School. It is stated by the answering respondent that the pension papers of the petitioner were returned by the respondent No. 3 as he was not entitled to it for rendering less than 10 years of continuous service in a sanctioned post: this was intimated to him by the respondent No. 4 vide his letter dated 18.8.2006. It is, therefore, submitted by the answering respondent that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.