Partha Sarathi Ghosh vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 122 Cal

   Ct. 05
Item No.17
18.01.2022
(sayandeep)



                             WPA 21008 of 2021

                            [Via Video Conference]
                             Partha Sarathi Ghosh
                                      Vs.
                        The State of West Bengal & Ors.


                      Ms. Sima Ghosh
                                              .........for the petitioner
                      Ms. Gopa Roy
                                                 ...........for the State



                      Liberty is granted to the learned counsel

              appearing for the petitioner to amend the cause

              title during the course of the day.

                     Affidavit of service filed in court is kept

              with the record.

                      The material facts of the case are admitted

              and hence I have not called for affidavits.

                      The petitioner was a librarian of a Library

              of Sainthia High School in the district of Birbhum

              under West Bengal Board of Secondary Education

              and he retired on 31. 01.2017. Under the ROPA

              Rules, 2009 there was revision of the pensionary

              and gratuity amount payable to the petitioner.

              The revised pension payment order was issued on

              20.02.2020    and    gratuity   was     disbursed   on

              19.04.2020    in   terms   of   ROPA,    2009.      The
                    2




petitioner claims interest on delayed payment of

the revised gratuity.

        I have heard learned counsel for both

parties and I have considered the orders passed by

this court in similar facts.   It is settled law that

retired employee is entitled to some amount of

interest on delayed revised gratuity.

        There is 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   WP

17557(W) of 2017 (Narayan Chandra Saha V. State

of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein a coordinate

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 on refixation of

pay or pension wherein the Apex Court had held

that relief may be granted in spite of delay as it

does not affect the rights of the third party.

        In view of the aforesaid, 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
                       3




writ petitioner at the rate of 8% percent per

annum on the revised gratuity calculated on and

from 1st February,           2017   till   actual   date    of

payment.       Such payment is to be made within

eight weeks from the date of communication of the

certified copy of this order to be concerned

authorities.

         Since no affidavits have been invited, the

allegations contained in the writ petition are

deemed     not   to       have   been   admitted    by     the

respondents.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed

of. There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be made available to the parties upon

compliance of the requisite formalities.

(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.)