Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ashoke Kumar Pramanick vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 18 May, 2022
Ct. 05
Item No.08
18.05.2022
(suvendu)
WPA 7004 of 2022
Ashoke Kumar Pramanick
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Sima Ghosh
.........for the petitioner
Mr. Suman Dey
..........for the State
The Supplementary Affidavit filed on
behalf of the petitioner pursuant to the direction of
this Court showing that the pension papers of the
petitioner was sent by the Headmaster of the
School to the concerned District Inspector of
Schools on 18.09.2015 is taken on record.
The request for post facto approval to the
appointment of the petitioner was sent by the
School to the District Inspector of Schools on
01.08.2016. The petitioner retired as a Librarian
of the School on 31.01.2017. Hence there is no
delay in filing of the writ petition.
The material facts of the case are admitted
and hence I have not called for affidavits.
The petitioner was a librarian of a School
in the district of Birbhum and he retired on 31.
01.2017. The pension payment order was issued
on 27.07.2021. Under the ROPA Rules, 2019
there was revision of the pensionary and gratuity
amount payable to the petitioner. The arrear
pension and gratuity were disbursed on
17.08.2021 in terms of ROPA 2019. The petitioner
2
claims interest on delayed payment of the arear
pension and 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 payment of arrear pension and
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
writ petitioner at the rate of 8% percent per
annum on the arrear pension and 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.
3
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.
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.)
