Disposed¶12

Swapna Samanata Jana v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC6 Mar 2024WPA/24/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired Assistant Teacher; pension; gratuity; arrear pension; ROPA Rules, 2019; revised pension payment order 08.09.2021; delayed payment; interest @ 8% per annum from 14.02.2020; delay in filing writ petition; no statutory limitation; Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh (2008) 8 SCC 648; Narayan Chandra Saha W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017; Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal; Treasury Officer; payment within eight weeks; writ petition disposed of; allegations deemed not admitted; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Interest @ 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, to be paid within eight weeks from the date of communication of the order. ¶12

Swapna Samanata Jana Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension amount disbursed under ROPA, 2019. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

Directed the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and 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.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Ordered that such interest payment be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order.

¶11

Key takeaways

Granted the relief sought notwithstanding the considerable delay in filing of the writ petition, acting in view of the precedent relied upon by the petitioner (no statutory limitation applicable; relief not affecting third-party rights).ratio¶11
Since no affidavit-in-opposition was called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 06.03.2024 disposing of WPA 24 of 2024 (Swapna Samanta Jana Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). The petitioner, a retired Assistant Teacher (retired 31.05.2018; first PPO 10.05.2018), claimed interest on the delayed payment of her gratuity and arrear pension as revised under ROPA Rules, 2019 (revised PPO issued and amounts disbursed on 08.09.2021). She relied on a co-ordinate Bench order in W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017 (Narayan Chandra Saha vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.), which rested on Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648, on limitation relating to payment or refixation of pay or pension. Although the writ petition was filed after considerable delay, the court directed the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and the concerned Treasury Officer to pay interest @ 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, within eight weeks of communication of the order. No affidavit-in-opposition having been called for, the allegations were deemed not admitted; no order as to costs.

¶1

06.03.2024 Item No.346 RP Ct. No.13

¶2

WPA 24 of 2024 Swapna Samanta Jana Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶3

Ms. Arpita Saha ….. for the petitioner

¶4

Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is kept with the record.

¶5

None appears for the State.

¶6

The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of a High School, who retired on 31.05.2018. The first pension payment order was issued on 10.05.2018. 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 08.09.2021 and the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension amount was disbursed on 08.09.2021 in terms of ROPA, 2019. The petitioner claims interest on delayed payment of the revised gratuity and revised arrear pension amount.

¶7

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

¶8

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 judgement 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

¶9

¶10

had held that relief may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of the third party.

¶11

In view of the above and after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, 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.

¶12

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶13

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.

¶14

There will be no order as to costs.

¶15

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

¶16

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)

Swapna Samanata Jana v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapna Samanata Jana v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandip Das and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S. Cmj Service Private Limited Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Jogindar Shaw @ Yogendra Sah Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Swami Smaranananda President and Ors. Vs Na

Kajari Karmakar @ Kajari Marick Vs Employees and State Insurance Corporation and Anr.

Sail Growth Works Vs Durga Mahato and Ors.