Single judge allowed W.P. 11246 of 2020, directing Treasury and Pension authorities to pay 8% annual interest on retired Assistant Teacher Shahjahan Mallick's delayed arrear pension from 01.10.1993, overriding delay arguments.
Payment of interest at 8% per annum on arrear pension from 01.10.1993 to date of payment within eight weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
106 04.01.2021 adeb
WPA 11246 of 2020
Shahjahan Mallick - Versus –
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Moumi Yasmin …..For the petitioner Ms. Neelam Singh ……For the State
Affidavit-of-service filed in Court is kept with the record.
The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of a Primary School who retired on 30.09.1993. He had completed all pension-related formalities prior to his retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released his arrear pension amount on 16.12.2002. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the arrear pension amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the arrear pension amount.
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
2
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.
In view of the aforesaid, 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 writ petitioner @ 8% per annum on the arrear pension calculated from 01.10.1993 till the date of payment.
Such payment is to be made within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.
This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.
Urgent photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties on urgent basis.
( Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J. )
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on delayed arrear pension despite considerable delay in filing the writ petition.
Whether lack of statutory limitation period justifies granting relief in a delayed writ petition regarding pension arrears.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India Vs. Tarsem SinghRelied on¶9
(2008) 8 S.C.C. 648 · Who else cites this
Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.Relied on¶9
W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017 (Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Shahjahan Mallick
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Rajarshi Bharadwaj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
