Allowed

Laxmi Lama v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC30 Jun 2022WPA/1516/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Director of Pension and Treasury Officer to pay interest at 8% per annum on delayed principal gratuity, arrear pension, revised arrear, and revised gratuity amounts to a retired teacher, allowing the petition despite delay as it does not affect third-party rights.

What did the court decide?

Directed to pay interest @ 8% per annum on principal gratuity, arrear pension, revised arrear, and revised gratuity within eight weeks.

Laxmi Lama Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

30.06.2022 Court No.13 Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench Item No.8 AP

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

WPA 1516 of 2022

Laxmi Lama

-Vs-

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶7

Ms. Sabita Khutia (Bhunya)

¶8

… … for the petitioner

¶9

The affidavit of service filed by the learned Advocate for the petitioner in Court today be kept on record.

¶10

The petitioner was teacher of a school, District- Nadia, who retired on 30.09.2017. The first pension payment order was issued on 09.10.2018. Under the ROPA Rules, 2019 there was revision of the pension and gratuity amount payable to the petitioner. The revised pension payment order was issued on 08.10.2021 and the revised gratuity amount was disbursed on 04.11.2021 in terms of ROPA, 2019. The petitioner claims interest on delayed payment of the principal gratuity and arrear pension amount and also revised arrear pension amount and revised gratuity amount.

¶11

This 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.

¶12

The petitioner relies upon an order in WP 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

¶13

¶14

in the case of Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh, reported in (2008) 8 SCC 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.

¶15

In view of the above and after hearing the learned Counsel for the 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 @ 8% per annum on the principal gratuity and arrear pension amount calculated on and from 01.10.2017 till the date of payment and to pay interest @ 8% per annum on the revised arrear and revised gratuity from 14.02.2020 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.

¶16

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶17

Since, no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

¶18

There will be no order as to costs.

¶19

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis.

¶20

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)

Laxmi Lama v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Lama 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tanmay Roy Vs State & Ors.

MD Kamruzzaman & Ors. Vs State & Ors.

Dukhi Ram Dolui & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Dhan Bahadur Chhetri Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Shanti Baraily Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Meena Chhetri(Subba) Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.