JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. B Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.K. Borah, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 being the authorities under the Elementary Education Department of Government of Assam, Ms. D.D. Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents no. 2 and 4 being the authorities under the Pension and Public Grievance Department of Government of Assam and Mr. A Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondents no. 3 and 9 being the authorities under the Finance Department. 2. The husband of the petitioner Kushal Thakuria who was a Grade-IV employee in the Uparhali Model LP School in the Kamrup district died on 16.05.2021. It is stated that the deceased husband of the petitioner was appointed on 04.11.2020. Having been appointed on 04.11.2020 and died on 16.05.2021, admittedly, the husband of the petitioner did not complete one year of service. 3. Rule 140 of the Assam Services(Pension) Rules, 1969(in short, Rules of 1969) inter-alia provides that in case of death while in service, the government servant should have completed a minimum period of one year service for the purpose of being entitled to family pension for the family members. 4. In the instant case, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the deceased husband of the petitioner having been not completed one year service, the pensionery benefits are not made available to the petitioner. 5. Reference is made to Rule 233 of the Rules 1969 which is extracted as below: “233. If any doubt arises as to the interpretation of any of these rules or about the applicability of any of these rules in case of any person governed by the rules in the Assam Pension Manual, Second Edition, 1939, immediately before commencement of these rules, the matter shall be referred to the State Government in the Finance Department who reserve to themselves the right of changing the rules and interpreting their meaning and whose decision thereon shall be final.” 6. Reference is also made to Rules 234 and 235 which are again extracted below: “234. In any case in which a pension is not admissible under any specific provision of any of these rules, the Governor may sanction the grant of pension in exceptional circumstances, if the grant is not inconsistent with the general spirit of rules. 235. Reference is also made to Rules 234 and 235 which are again extracted below: “234. In any case in which a pension is not admissible under any specific provision of any of these rules, the Governor may sanction the grant of pension in exceptional circumstances, if the grant is not inconsistent with the general spirit of rules. 235. Where the Governor of Assam is satisfied that the operation of any of these rules causes undue hardship in any particular case, he may dispense with or relax the requirements of that rule to such extent and subject to such conditions as he may consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and equitable manner provided that the case shall not be dealt with a manner less favourable than that provided in these rules.” 7. Rule 233 provides that the State Government in the Finance Department shall reserve to themselves the right of changing the rules and interpreting their meaning in respect of any doubt as regards the interpretation of any of the rules. 8. Rule 234 provides that the Governor of Assam may sanction grant of pension in exceptional circumstances, if the grant is not inconsistent with the general spirit of rules. Rule 235 further provides that if the Governor of Assam is satisfied that the operation of any of these rules causes undue hardship in any particular case, he may dispense with or relax the requirement of that rule to such extent and subject to such conditions as may be considered necessary for dealing with a given case in a just or equitable manner. 9. In the instant case, the petitioner raises an issue that although the husband of the petitioner did not complete one year of service so as to avail the family pension under Rule 140 of the Rules of 1969, the two authorities, one referred in Rule 233 i.e. the State Government in the Finance Department and the Governor of Assam as referred in Rules 234 and 235 of the Rules of 1969 may consider the claim of the petitioner for family pension as per the discretion provided under the aforesaid Rules. 10. In the circumstance, 11. 10. In the circumstance, 11. In other words, the respondents authorities in the Elementary Education Department would pass a reasoned order on such application that may be made by the petitioner under Rules 234 and 235 and if the authorities prima facie is of the view that the matter may be placed before the Hon’ble Governor of Assam, it be done so. In doing so, the authorities may also take note of the Rule 266 of the Rules of 1969. 12. We further clarify that by allowing the petitioner to submit an application, the Court is not expressing any view either in favour or against the claim of the petitioner that may be made and it is entirely for the departmental authorities to take their own reasoned view on the matter. 13. Writ petition stands disposed of as indicated above.