A retired Assistant Teacher filed a writ petition seeking interest on gratuity delayed for over a year. The High Court directed the Director of Pension and Treasury to pay interest at 8% per annum on delayed payments with no order on costs.
Directed respondent authorities to pay interest @ 8% per annum on gratuity from 01.12.2003.
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.
117 20.01.2021. ab Ct. 15
W.P.A. 943 of 2021
Basudeb Biswas Vs The State West Bengal & Ors.
Mrs. Sabita Khutia (Bhunya) … For the Petitioner.
Md. Zakir Hossain … For the State.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today is kept with the record.
The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of a Primary School, Nadia who retired on 30.11.2003. He had completed all his pension-related formalities prior to his retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released his gratuity amount on 01.02.2005. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity.
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. No. 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
2
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 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 calculated from 01.12.2003 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.
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 certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for interest on delayed gratuity is maintainable despite a considerable delay in filing.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on the gratuity amount for the interim period of delay.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.Referred¶8
W.P. No. 17557 (W) of 2017 (Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Union of India Vs. Tarsem SinghRelied on¶9
Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh (2008) 8 S.C.C. 648 · Who else cites this
Basudeb Biswas
The State West Bengal
Rajarshi Bharadwaj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
