REKHAMONI DEKA DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. SC Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D Mazumdar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appearing for the State respondents and Mr. P Nayak, learned counsel for the respondents No. 4 and 5 being the authorities under the BTC.

(2.) The husband of the petitioner was working as an Assistant Teacher (Science) in the Yogi Satyananda Girls High School in the Baksa district of Assam and his services were provincialised w.e.f. 01.08.1995. The husband of the petitioner did not return home from school on 20.05.2014 and since then his whereabouts are not known to anyone. On 23.05.2014, the petitioner lodged an ejahar before the Goreswar Police Station, which was registered as Goreswar Police Station Case No. 41/2014 under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code. In respect of the missing of the husband of the petitioner, one Habeas corpus petition being W.P.(Crl) 03/2015 was also instituted. Apart from the habeas corpus petition, the petitioner also instituted another writ petition being WP(C) No. 3399/2015, inter-alia claiming for family pension under Rule 143-A of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 15.06.2015. In the circumstance, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Division Bench which was numbered as WA 351/2015.

(3.) The WA 351/2015 was given a final consideration by the judgment and order dated 27.11.2017. In the writ appellate proceeding, an up-to-date status report of the Baihata Chariali Police Station Case No. 154/2014 as on 03.11.2017 was placed before the Division Bench. The contents of the report was recorded in the judgment dated 27.11.2017 of the Division Bench. The purport of the status report was that the husband of the petitioner may have been involved in obtaining loan from private sources and that there may be a possibility of some of the persons from whom he had borrowed money to be involved in his disappearance. The Division Bench accordingly allowed the investigation to go on. But, however having so provided, the Division Bench also took note of the provision of Rule 143-A of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 and observed that as per the said Rule 143-A, the family of a missing Government employee at the first instance be paid the amount of salary due, leave encashment due and the amount of GPF etc after one year from the date of receipt of a report from the police.