Allowed

Kartik Kundu v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC11 Dec 2020WPA/10189/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired Head Teacher, sought interest on gratuity delayed by authorities. Court allowed petition despite delay, relying on precedents regarding pension rights, and directed payment of interest.

What did the court decide?

Director of Pension and concerned Treasury Officer to pay interest @ 8% per annum on gratuity from 01.12.2012 till date of payment within eight weeks.

Kartik Kundu Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

11.12.2020 adeb Sl. 40 Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. No. 10189 of 2020

¶3

Kartik KUNDU

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Mr. Biswajit Mal

¶7

……..For the Petitioner

¶8

Ms. Neelam Singh

¶9

..for the State

¶10

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is kept with the record.

¶11

The petitioner was a Head Teacher of a Primary School, who retired from service on 30.11.2012. The petitioner had completed all pension –related formalities. The pension payment order issued on 31.01.2013. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released gratuity amount on 30.09.2013. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity amount.

¶12

There is a considerable delay in filing of the writ petition, which the petitioner seeks to justify by stating that there is no statutory period of limitation and neither parties have suffered due to this delay. It is the submission of the petitioner that accordingly the petition should be allowed. The petitioner relies upon an order in W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017 ( Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein a co-ordinate bench had relied upon the Supreme Court judgement in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh, reported in (2008) 8 S.C.C. 648 on the issue of limitation relating to payment or re-fixation of pay or pension wherein the Apex Court had held that relief may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of the third party.

¶13

¶14

In view of the above and after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I direct the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal as also the concerned Treasury Officer to pay interest to the petitioner @ 8% per annum on the gratuity amount calculated from 01.12.2012 till the date of payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶15

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of, however, no order as to costs.

¶16

Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.

¶17

Urgent photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties on urgent basis.

¶18

(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)

Kartik Kundu v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartik Kundu v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sikha De (Dutta) Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Anita Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bhakti Bhusan Sardar Vs State of West Bengal

Shyama Pada Mandal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Anandamoyee Roy Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sasanka Sekhar Mandal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.