Puspa Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 451 Cal

   Ct. 05
Item No.05
09.02.2022

(suvendu)

WPA 8386 of 2021

[Via Video Conference] Puspa Das Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Bnashi Badan Maity ...........for the petitioner

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

The petitioner's husband was an approved Peon of a College who retired from service on 31.05.2010 and died on 12.01.2017. The petitioner's husband had completed all pension- related formalities prior to his retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released the gratuity amount on 18.11.2011. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity amount. 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. 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 inspite of delay as it does not affect the rights of the third party.

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 gratuity amount calculated from 01.06.2010 till the date of payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.

Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.

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

(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.)