In this public interest litigation, the petitioner, a widow of a deceased Assistant Teacher, sought interest on delayed gratuity payment due to administrative delay by the State.
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.
19.01.2021 adeb Sl. 99 Ct. 15
WPA 687 of 2021
Angur Bala Bera Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Banshi Badan Maity
……..for the Petitioner
Mr. Milan Kumar Maity Mr. Kakali Samajpati Mr. Joytosh Majumder, Ld. GP
….for the State
Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is kept with the record.
The petitioner’s husband was an Assistant Teacher of a High School who retired from service on 31.10.1993 and died on 31.10.2020. The petitioner’s husband had completed all pension-related formalities. The pension payment order was issued on 22.03.2002. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released the gratuity amount on 23.10.2003.The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity 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 S.C.C. 648 on the issue of limitation relating to payment or re-fixation of
2
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 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 gratuity amount calculated from 01.11.1993 till the date of actual payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The writ petition is disposed of however, no order as to costs.
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 interest shall be granted for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity amount.
Whether the delay in filing the writ petition is a bar to the relief sought.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.Relied on¶10
W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017 ( Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Union of India Vs. Tarsem SinghReferred¶10
Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh, reported in (2008) 8 S.C.C. 648 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Angur Bala Bera
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
