Allowed

Nilmadhab Kundu v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC16 Dec 2020WPA/10190/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a retired Head Teacher, challenged the delay in receiving his gratuity amount. The court allowed the petition despite delay in filing, directing respondents to pay interest at 8% per annum on the gratuity amount from 01.02.2012 within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Interest to be paid @ 8% per annum on gratuity amount from 01.02.2012 till date of payment, within eight weeks.

Nilmadhab Kundu Vs State of West Bengal and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

94 16.12.2020. ab Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. 10190 of 2020

¶3

Nilmadhab Kundu Vs The State West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Biswajit Mal … For the Petitioner.

¶5

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

¶6

The petitioner was a Head Teacher of a Primary School, who retired from service on 31.01.2012. The petitioner had completed all pension-related formalities. The pension payment order issued on 24.05.2012. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released the gratuity amount on 30.09.2012. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity amount.

¶7

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.

¶8

The petitioner relies upon an order in W.P. No. 17557 (W) of 2017 (Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein a co-ordinate Bench of this court had relied upon a Supreme Court judgement in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh ,

¶9

¶10

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.

¶11

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 01.02.2012 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

¶15

(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)

Nilmadhab Kundu v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nilmadhab 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Paban Kumar Saha Vs State of Wb & Ors.

Sandip Kumar Biswas and Others Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Lilabati Mandal Roy Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Mathura Kanta Mandal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rabindra Nath Sen Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Nirupama De Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.