Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dulpa Guria vs The Government Of India on 23 February, 2022
23.02.2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Sl. No.06 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(PP) APPELLATE SIDE
(Via Video Conference)
WPA 20405 of 2021
Dulpa Guria
Vs.
The Government of India
Department of Telecommunications & Ors.
Mr. Subhrangsu Panda
....for the petitioner.
Mr. Ajay Dasgupta
....for the respondent nos.1-4.
Mr. Swapnalekha Auddy
....for the respondent no.6.
Two affidavits of service filed in Court today are
taken on record.
The petitioner's husband was an employee under
the Department of Telecommunication at the office of
GMT, Kharagpur under Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Limited (in short BSNL). The petitioner's husband
retired from service on attaining the age of
superannuation. The petitioner's husband was
receiving pension till his death on 29th June, 2015.
The petitioner claims to be entitled to the family
pension immediately after the death of her husband.
On the basis of the petitioner's claim, family pension
has been ultimately paid on 26th April, 2018 with all
arrears between 29th June, 2015 and 26th April, 2018.
The petitioner had made a representation to the
employer for interest on the arrear amount due to the
delay in paying the same. Since such representation
was not disposed of, the petitioner has approached
this Court for the interest on the arrear amount
between 29th June, 2015 and 26th April, 2018.
On behalf of the respondent nos.1-4, it is
submitted that the delay in disbursing the family
pension occurred due to mismatch in the name and
other particulars of the petitioner in the various
documents submitted by her for processing the family
pension.
Without going into the disputes as to the
reasons which resulted in belated disbursal of the
family pension, the fact remains that the respondent
nos.1-4 were supposed to pay the money immediately
after the death of the petitioner's husband, but was
ultimately required to pay the same on 26th April,
2018. The money, which was to flow out of the coffer
of the respondent nos.1-4, remained with them till
26th April, 2018. The respondent nos.1-4, therefor,
have derived benefit out of such money.
On the other hand, the petitioner, having not
been able to derive the benefit out of the money, has
suffered certain loss. The respondent nos.1-4,
therefor is required to compensate the petitioner by
paying interest for the delayed period.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the
respondent nos.1-4 are directed to pay interest on the
arrear sum on account of family pension that accrued
between 29th June, 2015 and 26th April, 2018 to the
petitioner @ 6% per annum. The rate of interest is
not only reasonable and fair but also the prevailing
bank interest rate. The interest rate @ 6% has also
been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
judgment reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 237 (State
of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. v. Dinavahi Lakshmi
Kameswari).
The respondent no.6, bank is represented and as
such, shall immediately take steps for disbursal of the
amount to the petitioner once the same is paid by the
respondent nos.1-4.
The parties shall act on the basis of a server
copy of this order without insisting upon production
of a certified copy thereof.
Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in
this writ petition. The same is disposed of accordingly
without any order as to costs.
Since I have not called for any affidavits,
allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to
have not been admitted.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance
of necessary formalities.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)
