WA 110/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR RS GARG HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Heard Mrs MD Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr KK Mahanta, learne d senior counsel for respondent No.4 and Mr BD Das, learned counsel for responde nt Nos.1 to 3. With the consent of the parties the matter is finally heard. The appellant Smti Niru Mahanta, undisputedly the second wife of deceased Mitrad ev Mahanta, has come to this court with a submission that the learned Single Jud ge was absolutely unjustified in granting the petition filed by Smti Kalindi Mah anta (since deceased), mother of Mitradev Mahanta and the other three petitioner s, issuing a direction that the minor children of Mitradev Mahanta would be enti tled to the family pension in precedence over the present appellant. It was also contended that the learned Single Judge was also unjustified in granting the Re view Petition No.52/2009 vide the impugned order dated 28-08-2009. In the appeal we had issued notices to the respondents and required the responde nt Nos.1, 2 and 3 to inform the court that under what resolution the Assam State Electricity Board had adopted the Central Govt Pension Rules. In reply to the s aid directions the Assam State Electricity Board has filed their affidavit dated 14-05-2010. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 contends that from th e proceedings of the Assam State Electricity Board meeting held on 03-09-1981 it would clearly appear that the Board had approved the agenda item and decided to adopt the Assam State Electricity Board Pension Rules placed before it which we re based on Central Govt Pension Rules. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, contended that the Assam State E lectricity Board never adopted the Central Govt Pension Rules but in fact adopte d the Assam State Electricity Board Pension Rules which are said to be based on the Central Govt Pension Rules. The submission further is that if the Assam Stat e Electricity Board Pension Rules have been adopted with an understanding that t hose are based on Central Govt Pension Rules then at a later stage it cannot be argued that if certain items are missing in the Assam State Electricity Board Pe nsion Rules then the Board would be allowed to fall back upon the Central Govt P ension Rules. The submission in fact is that once the Assam State Electricity Bo ard Pension Rules are adopted then rights of the parties are to be crystalised a nd finally decided in view of the said Rules and no external assistance can be t aken. Taking into consideration that the learned Single Judge has not taken into consi deration the resolution dated 03-09-1981, the notification dated 12-11-1981 and the circular dated 26-07-1984, we are of the opinion that the orders passed in t he writ petition and the review petition deserve to be set aside. Those are acco rdingly set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge. With all humility at our command, we will make a request to the learned Single J udge to take into consideration the notification/resolution and then decide the question placed before it. The parties present before us shall appear before the learned Single Judge on 08 -06-2010. Office is hereby directed to restore the writ petition to its original number an d list the same before the appropriate Bench. All pending Misc Cases are hereby disposed of.