Allowed

Ajoy Kumar Hait v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC14 Dec 2020WPA/10391/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State to pay 8% annual interest on delayed gratuity and arrear pension to a retired assistant teacher for the interim period from July 1, 2018, dismissing the petition after a delay due to lack of specific statutory limitation.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State to pay interest at 8% per annum on gratuity and arrear pension from 01.07.2018 until payment, to be executed within eight weeks.

Ajoy Kumar Hait Vs State of West Bengal and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

14.12.2020 adeb Sl. 07 Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. No. 10391 of 2020

¶3

Ajoy Kumar Hait

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Mrs. Sabita Khutia ( Bhunya)

¶7

……..For the Petitioner Ms. Jyotsna Roy Mukherjee

¶8

…..For the State

¶9

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

¶10

The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of a Primary School, Nadia who retired on 30.06.2018. He had completed all his pension-related formalities prior to his retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released his gratuity and arrear pension amount on 02.06.2019. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity and arrear pension for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity and arrear pension amount.

¶11

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 refixation 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.

¶12

¶13

In view of the above and after hearing the learned Counsel for both parties, 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 and arrear pension calculated from 01.07.2018 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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)

Ajoy Kumar Hait v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajoy Kumar Hait 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

Shivapado Shubham Mandal @ Mandal Shubham Shivapado Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Kartik Kundu Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rani Bala Saren Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sweta Banerjee Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Krishna Chakraborty Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.