Disposed

Manaranjan Chakraborty v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC28 Nov 2022WPA/3917/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged pension calculation errors due to form discrepancies. Court disposed of the writ application by directing parties to file revised forms and the administration to update pension payments within six weeks, ensuring the earlier pending matter serves no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

Direction to parties to file revised 10D form and respondent to revise pension and issue PPO within six weeks.

Manaranjan Chakraborty Vs State of West… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

4 28.11.2022

¶2

sb Ct 550

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶4

WPA 3917 of 2022

¶5

Manaranjan Chakraborty Vs.

¶6

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶7

Mr. Victor Chatterjee,

¶8

Mr. Barnamoy Basak, … For the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Ayan Banerjee Ms. Debasree Dhamali … For SBSTC.

¶10

Mr. Jasobanta Rakshit … For the respondent no.6.

¶11

Mr. Rakshit, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.6 submits that computation errors have crept in by reasons of incorrect representation made in the previous 10D Form filed with the Provident Fund Authorities. He says that pension payable to the writ petitioner shall be revised subject to submission of a request letter by the writ petitioner in the form of revised 10D Form to be filed by the writ petitioner along with the respondent no.2.

¶12

Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate, representing South Bengal State Transport Corporation (in short, SBSTC), by drawing attention of this Court to a report filed by the said respondent submits that the said respondent having detected that the date of birth of the petitioner was wrongly indicated in 10D Form, had later filed a revised

¶13

¶14

10D Form incorporating therein the correct date of birth of the writ petitioner. According to Mr. Banerjee, the said respondent has already taken steps for rectification of all the errors in 10D Form and nothing further requires to be done.

¶15

I have considered the submissions made by the parties. I am of the view that no useful purpose will be served in keeping the writ application pending especially when the matter pertains to computation errors in disbursal of pensionary benefits to the petitioner. As would appear from the above the controversy is with regard to the statement of disclosure of correct particulars of the petitioner in 10D Form. However, there is no dispute as regards the date of birth or the date of leaving service of the petitioner.

¶16

Having regard to the statement made by Mr. Rakshit, I direct the petitioner and the respondent SBSTC to file a revised 10D Form incorporating the date of birth and the date of leaving service, for the respondent no.6, to do the needful.

¶17

The respondent SBSTC is directed to resubmit the aforesaid 10D Form with the respondent no.6 within a period of two weeks from date.

¶18

In the event, the aforesaid revised 10D Form is submitted, the respondent no.6 shall revise the

¶19

¶20

pensionary benefit payable to the petitioner and issue a revised Pension Payment Order (PPO). The entire exercise must be completed with a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the revised 10D Form by the respondent/SBSTC.

¶21

With the aforesaid observations and/or directions, the instant writ application, being WPA 3917 of 2022 stands disposed of.

¶22

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶23

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.

¶24

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)

Manaranjan Chakraborty v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manaranjan Chakraborty 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasenjit Sahu & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Suraj Choudhary & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sujan Chowdhury Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta Jute Manufacturing Company Limited Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ajay Tiwari and Others Vs Union of India and Ors.

Tarun Kumar Dutta Vs the State of West Bengal & Ors.