Allowed

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC14 Dec 2020WPA/10396/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired assistant teacher sought interest on delayed gratuity and arrear pension payments due to a one-year administrative delay. Despite a considerable delay in filing the writ petition, the Court granted interest to avoid prejudice, relying on precedents that delay does not affect third-party rights when statutory relief is overdue.

What did the court decide?

Interest paid at 8% per annum on gratuity and arrear pension from 01.08.2018 until payment, to be deposited within eight weeks of the order.

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury Vs State of West… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

14.12.2020 adeb Sl. 08 Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. No. 10396 of 2020

¶3

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury Vs.

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mrs. Sabita Khutia ( Bhunya)

¶6

Mr. Sandip Ghosh

¶7

……..For the Petitioner

¶8

Md. Mansoor Alam

¶9

…..For the State

¶10

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

¶11

The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of a High School, Nadia who retired on 31.07.2018. She had completed all her pension-related formalities prior to her retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released her gratuity and arrear pension amount on 01.09.2019. 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.

¶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 refixation of pay or pension wherein the Apex Court had held

¶13

¶14

that relief may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of the third party.

¶15

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 01.08.2018 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankari Ghosh Chowdhury 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.

Ajoy Kumar Hait 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.