Amitava Ghosh vs Union Of India & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7586 Cal

16.11.2022          IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
  DL-8            CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
   (PP)                  APPELLATE SIDE
  Ct.21
                           WPA 16385 of 2021

                            Amitava Ghosh
                                   Vs.
                           Union of India & Ors.


                   Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee,
                   Mr. Sudipta Nayan Ghosh
                                                  ....for the petitioner.

                   Mr. Kallol Guha thakurata
                              ....for the respondent nos.2, 4, 5 & 7.

By an order dated July 15, 2022, a coordinate

Bench of this Hon'ble Court had directed the

respondents concerned, being the Coal Mines

Provident Fund Organisation (in short "CMPFO") to

file a report on affidavit to bring on record whether

any departmental proceeding was initiated by the

employer against the petitioner and the outcome of

the said departmental proceedings. By an order

dated June 24, 2022, the same coordinate Bench

recorded that the issue whether the pendency of the

criminal proceedings was a fault on the part of the

petitioner, which would disentitle him to claim

interest was required to be considered.

Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel, appearing on

behalf of the petitioner draws the attention of this

Court to the report on affidavit filed on behalf of the

respondents concerned. The same has been affirmed

by the Regional Commissioner - II, Coal Mines

Provident Fund Organisation (CMPFO) on August 18,

2022.

From the said report on affidavit, it appears that

no averments have been made with regard to the

initiation/pendency of the departmental proceedings

against the petitioner. Neither was any rule/policy

brought on record to show that the rule/policy of the

employer disentitle the petitioner to claim interest on

the retiral benefits due to the pendency of criminal

proceedings against him.

Mr. Guha Thakurata, learned counsel,

appearing on behalf of CMPFO/respondent nos.2, 4,

5 and 7 submits that the petitioner was put on

suspension and that in effect evidenced the fact that

the departmental proceedings were initiated against

him. Furthermore, two criminal proceedings were

initiated against him. CBI investigation was being

made against the petitioner and, therefore, the

payment of his retiral benefits along with interest

thereon could not be considered by the

employer/CMPFO.

Having considered the rival submissions of the

parties and the materials placed on record, this Court

finds that the employer has failed to bring on record

either the pendency of the departmental proceedings

against the petitioner, which is initiated by way of

filing a charge-sheet. Neither is the employer/

CMPFO able to show that from this extant rule/policy

that the pendency of criminal proceedings without

initiation of departmental proceedings would

disentitle the petitioner from claiming his retiral

benefits.

In the light of the discussions above, this Court

directs the respondent no.2 to pay interest @ 6 % p.a.

from May 1, 2013 (the date subsequent to the date of

retirement) till May 31, 2022 (date of payment) in view

of the recent judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court,

reported in (2022) 4 SCC 627.

With the direction aforesaid, WPA 16385 of

2021 is disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this

order duly downloaded from the official website of

this Hon'ble Court.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if

applied for, be supplied to the parties upon

compliance of all necessary formalities.

(Lapita Banerji, J.)