Allowed

Amar Chandra Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC11 Jan 2021WPA/230/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a writ petition filed by a retired Assistant Teacher seeking interest on delayed gratuity. The court directed the Director of Pension and Treasury to pay 8% per annum interest from September 1, 2013, despite the petitioner's significant delay in filing.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of interest @ 8% per annum on gratuity amount from 01.09.2013 till the date of payment within eight weeks of communication of this order.

Amar Chandra Maity Vs State of West Bengal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

11.01.2021 adeb Sl. 113 Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. 230 of 2021

¶3

Amar Chandra Maity

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Ms. Moumi Yasmin

¶7

……..For the Petitioner

¶8

Ms. Jyotsna Mukherjee

¶9

..For the State

¶10

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

¶11

The petitioner was a Assistant Teacher of a Primary School, who retired from service on 31.08.2012. The petitioner had completed all pension –related formalities. The pension payment order issued on 10.12.2013. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released gratuity amount on 07.02.2014. 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

¶13

¶14

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 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 01.09.2013 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 accordingly 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.)

Amar Chandra Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Chandra Maity 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

Tapan Kumar Jash and Ors. Vs the Visva Bharati and Ors.

Debasish Mitra Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Debasish Mitra Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Amarchandra Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dhananjay Samanta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bimal Chandra Das Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.