This single-judge order dismisses a contempt application and clarifies that the Pension Payment Order (PPO) issued to the petitioner is effective from her late husband's retirement date in 2009. The court directs the petitioner's department to calculate and pay all pending arrears within one month and to revise the PPO accordingly.
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.
23.06.2023 Court No.13 Item No.19 pk
CPAN 268 of 2023 In
WPA 13715 of 2021
Chaitali Dasgupta Vs.
Sanjoy Chattapadhay and Anr.
Ms. Santi Das
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Vaisya Mr. Nilay Baran Mondal
… For the Contemnor No.2.
2
3
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Pension Payment Order (PPO) issued to the petitioner in May 2023 should be effective from the date of retirement of the late husband.
Whether arrears of pension should be paid to the petitioner covering the period from November 14, 2009 to May 23, 2023.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Abhijit Baidya Vs. State of West BengalDistinguished¶10
Abhijit Baidya Vs. State of West Bengal
Md. Abdul Ghani Vs. State of West BengalDistinguished¶11
Md. Abdul Ghani Vs. State of West Bengal
Chaitali Dasgupta
Sanjoy Chattapadhay
Rajasekhar Mantha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
