Allowed

Kabita Subba v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC26 Jul 2022WPA/1983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired teacher sought interest on delayed payment of revised gratuity and arrear pension. The Calcutta High Court directed the authorities to pay interest at 8% per annum from February 14, 2020, directing payment within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Payment of interest at 8% per annum on revised gratuity and arrear pension from 14.02.2020 to be made within eight weeks.

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

¶1

26.07.2022 Court No.13 Item No.8 AP

¶2

HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

¶3

WPA 1983 of 2022

¶4

Kabita Subba Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal and Ors.

¶6

Ms. Sudipa Biswas

¶7

... For the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Srikanta Paul

¶9

... For the State.

¶10

Affidavit of service file in Court today is taken on record.

¶11

The petitioner was a teacher of a school, who retired on 31.08.2019. The first pension payment order was issued on 25.01.2022. Under the ROPA Rules, 2019 there was revision of the pensionary and gratuity amount payable to the petitioner. The revised pension payment order was issued on 08.06.2022 and the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension amount was disbursed on 25.06.2022 in terms of ROPA, 2019. The petitioner claims interest on delayed payment of the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension 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

¶13

¶14

to this delay. It is the submission of the petitioner that accordingly the petition should be allowed.

¶15

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 judgment 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.

¶16

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 to the petitioner @ 8% per annum on the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension amount calculated on and 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.

¶17

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶18

Since, no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made in the writ petition

¶19

¶20

are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

¶21

There will be no order as to costs.

¶22

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

¶23

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)

Kabita Subba v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabita Subba 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

Frady Anthony Martin Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Uday Brahman Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Udeen La Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

MD Farmazur Rahaman Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Mr Saukat Ali Vs Debashis Mitra and Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.