Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/4449/2024 of SARBESWAR BARMAN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS on 25 August 2026
GAHC010109052024 2026:GAU-AS:12318 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4449/2024 SARBESWAR BARMAN S/O- LATE MADHURAM BARMAN, R/O- WARD NO-14, CHOWK BAZAR, P.O- CHOWK BAZAR, P.S AND DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN-781334 VERSUS THE
GAHC010109052024
2026:GAU-AS:12318
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4449/2024
SARBESWAR BARMAN
S/O- LATE MADHURAM BARMAN,
R/O- WARD NO-14, CHOWK BAZAR,
P.O- CHOWK BAZAR,
P.S AND DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN-781334
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REP. BY SECRETARY COOPERATION,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, ASSAM
2:THE ASSAM STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
CHRISTIAN BASTI
GUWAHATI 781005
KAMRUP(M) ASSAM
3:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
THE ASSAM STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION
CHRISTIAN BASTI
GUWAHATI 781005
KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM
4:THE MANAGER
FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS
ASSAM STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION
CHRISTIAN BASTI
GUWAHATI 781005
KAMRUP(M )
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S DUTTA, MR U.SARMAH
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CO OP, MR. R SEKHAR(R-2,3,4),MR. B D CHOWDHURY (R- 2,3,4)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
26.08.2026 Heard Mr. S Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K A Sodial, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S K Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 as well as Mr. B D Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4.
2. By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks release of the arrear salary and allowances and other retiral dues allegedly payable to him, together with interest thereon.
3. The specific case of the petitioner is that although his service was non-pensionable, he is nevertheless entitled to certain arrears and retiral benefits, which, according to him, remain unpaid. The claims raised by the petitioner include, inter alia, the following:
(a) 39 months arrear pay as per 5th pay revision of Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1995 to 31.03.1998.
(b) Arrear Dearness Allowance (declared by Corporation time to time) as per 6th Pay Commission.
(c) 2% house rent arrear w.e.f. December 2018 to August, 2020, i.e., 21 months house rent arrear amounting to Rs. 7,358/-.
(d) Hills allowance/Remote area allowance w.e.f. December, 2018 to September, 2020, i.e., for 22 months @ Rs. 480/- per month total amounting to Rs. 10560/-.
(e) Leave Encashment against the service period as per rules.
(f) Arrear of pay and allowances on the 7th pay commission, which is yet to be paid w.e.f. 01.01.2016 to 31.07.2022.
(g) Arrear of gratuity/CPF (as per 7th pay commission).
(h) Gratuity amounts.
(i) Contributory Provident Fund amounts.
4. The respondents, in their affidavit-in-opposition, have disputed the manner in which the petitioner has projected his claims. It has, however, been stated that out of the retiral benefits payable to the petitioner, an amount of Rs.15,73,873/- towards CPF has already been paid. It has further been stated that an amount of Rs.1,40,000/- has been paid towards leave encashment, against the amount of Rs.4,22,670/- claimed by the petitioner.
5. The respondents have further stated that the petitioner had certain outstanding liabilities, including an amount of Rs.72,000/- allegedly borrowed by him from one Syed Nazrul Islam, a depositor of the Assam State Warehousing Corporation, Rangia Centre, and that the petitioner had been requested to settle the said amount.
6. During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, by placing on record the instruction dated 17.06.2026, submits that a further sum of Rs.2,25,000/- has already been released to the petitioner towards his retirement benefits. The said submission is not disputed by Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner has received the aforesaid amount.
7. The instruction dated 17.06.2026 is taken on record and marked as “X”.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that notwithstanding the payments already made, substantial retirement dues payable to the petitioner still remain outstanding.
9. Mr. B. D. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4, submits, on instructions, that the balance admissible retirement dues payable to the petitioner shall be duly worked out and released within a short period of time.
10. Having regard to the aforesaid submission and without entering into the merits of the individual claims raised by the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 to determine and release, in accordance with the applicable rules and upon due verification, all admissible balance retirement dues payable to the petitioner, after giving due credit to the amounts already released to him. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed and the admissible amount released to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
11. It is, however, clarified that if any component of the claim raised by the petitioner is found to be not admissible under the applicable rules, the respondents shall communicate the reasons for such non-payment to the petitioner. The petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue such claim in accordance with law, if so advised.
12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant Pranab Kumar Deka Digitally signed by Pranab Kumar Deka Date: 2026.08.27 10:56:20 +05'30'