Allowed

Smita Sanyal v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta HC23 Aug 2023WPA/3658/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition filed by a retired teacher seeking enhanced pension and pay scale benefits based on her upgraded post-graduate qualification, directing the respondent to implement the upgrade with consequential benefits. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to these benefits as a matter of right despite the passage of time.

What did the court decide?

Directive to immediately implement the upgraded enhanced scale of pay and consequential benefits with retrospective effect from May 15, 2005, to be completed within eight weeks.

Smita Sanyal Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

3 23.08.2023 Court No. 35 D.Hira

¶2

WPA 3658 of 2009

¶3

Smita Sanyal Vs.

¶4

State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Ekramul Bari, Mr. Sk. Imtiaj Uddin.

¶6

… for the petitioner

¶7

This matter appear under the heading “to be mentioned” for clarification that if the point involved in this writ petition is presently pending for adjudication before the Hon’ble Full Bench.

¶8

On the basis of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, it is now found that the scale of pay regarding master degree holders is not an issue pending before the Hon’ble Full Bench. Therefore, this Court concedes to the submissions made that the matter involved in this writ petition is not covered by the issues now pending before the Hon’ble Full Bench, for adjudication.

¶9

Let this matter be disposed of by the following order.

¶10

Mr. Bari being assisted by Mr. Imtiaj Uddin represents the petitioner. No one has represented the respondents in this case, on the last occasion and today also. Hence, it is found that the respondents are not interested to contest this writ petition. The writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal.

¶11

¶12

In spite of directions of this Court dated July 19^th 2023, no report has been submitted in Court.

¶13

Petitioner’s prayer, inter alia, are as follows –

¶14

A Writ of Mandamus directing, particularly, the respondent no. 3 to grant post graduate scale of pay to the petitioner in view of her upgraded qualification with effect from May 15, 2005.

¶15

Petitioner says that her service as an Assistant Teacher of Dhupguri Girls High School, District – Jalpaiguri, she has accomplished post graduate degree and thus upgraded her qualification in view of such upgradation in her qualification. According to her, she is entitled to the benefits of enhanced pay of scale under the ROPA Rules, 1998. Petitioner has made prayer before the District Inspector of Schools, (S.R), Jalpaiguri on October 19, 2008. Subsequent thereto, the school authorities were requested vide letter dated January 15, 2009 to submit necessary documents in this regard. However, the petitioner has not been granted the benefits in terms of her upgradation, in qualification, by the respondent authorities. Petitioner seeks an order to mandate grant of such benefit to her.

¶16

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, in addition to submitting the facts as above, has also informed the Court that at present the petitioner is retired and drawing pension according to the old scale of pay without any benefit for upgradation.

¶17

¶18

Since the facts of upgradation of petitioner’s qualification with effect from May 15, 2005 is uncontroverted in this case and also the fact that in case of upgradation of qualification she would be entitled to the benefits for revision of scale of pay in terms of the Rules as above, it is found that the prayer of the petitioner is legible to be allowed.

¶19

Hence, the writ petition is allowed with the directions upon the respondent authorities to immediately implement the upgraded enhanced scale of pay to the petitioner in accordance with her upgraded qualification with effect from May 15, 2005 and also the consequential benefits including the enhanced benefits as applicable.

¶20

Let the entire exercise be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. For the purpose of communication, the server copy of the order would suffice.

¶21

With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of with the applications pending, if any.

¶22

(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)

Smita Sanyal v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smita Sanyal v. State of West Bengal & 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

Sutrishna Das (Naskar) Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Jagajiban Let Vs Birbhum District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Nirmal Kumar Biswas Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Sanjoy Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Durgapada Ghosh and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Prativa Sinha & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.