Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nisith Ghosh Dastidar vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 5 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta
WPA 10324 of 2015
Nisith Ghosh Dastidar
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the petitioner : Mr. Susanta Pal
.....Advocate
For the State : Mr. Milan Kumar Maity
.....Advocate
For the Respondent nos. 2 to 5 : Mr. Niladri Bhattacharjee
Ms. Deblina Chattaraj
Mr. Rohan Chatterjee
......Advocates
Heard lastly on : 02.08.2022
Judgment on : 05.09.2022
Jay Sengupta, J.:
1. This is an application praying for direction upon the respondents to
pay and disburse interest at the rate of 10% per annum for the period from
1st September 2008 to 4th February 2015 for payment of gratuity and leave
salary to the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted as
follows. The petitioner retired from service of the Calcutta Tramways
Company (1978) Ltd. on 03.08.2008. Upon superannuation as an Inspector,
on 01.10.2008 the petitioner was paid his provident fund amount, gratuity
and leave salary amount in the unrevised scale. On 04.02.2015 the
petitioner was paid his rest gratuity and leave salary amount by cheque. As
no interest was paid for the delayed payment, on 08.04.2015 the petitioner
made a representation before the Managing Director of the Calcutta
Tramways Company (1978) Ltd. with a request to release interest amount at
the rate of 10% for delayed payment of gratuity and leave salary. It was
pertinent to mention that the revision in the pay scale was given effect to
from 17.09.2009.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 5
submitted as follows. If at all any interest was be payable, it would not be
from 01.09.2008 because the revision in pay scale took place only on
17.09.2009. At present, there was a scheme which allowed payment of
interest at the rate of 5% per annum.
4. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State adopted the
submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 to 5.
5. I heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and
perused the writ petition.
6. The undisputed facts in this case are that the petitioner retired
from his service with the Calcutta Tramways Company (1978) Ltd. on
03.08.2008. On 01.10.2008 he was paid his provident fund amount,
gratuity and leave salary in the unrevised scale. In the meantime there was
a revision in the pay scale that was given effect to from 17.09.2009. On
04.02.2015 he was paid his rest gratuity and leave salary amount by
cheque. However, no interest was paid on the delayed payment. The
petitioner made a representation on 08.04.2015 which went unanswered by
the respondents.
7. Money has a present value as well as a future value. The two are
balanced by an amount of interest that would be due on a sum as on a
particular date. If A is entitled to a sum of money in the year X, then he
would obviously be entitled to get some interest on the same if the money is
paid to him afterwards i.e., in the year X+1, for instance.
8. Therefore, a minimum amount as interest would be due to the
present petitioner for the delayed payment of retiral benefits in the revised
scale. At the same time, the dues cannot go beyond 17.09.2009 on which
the new scale was given effect too.
9. In view of the above, the respondents 2 to 5 are directed to pay to
the petitioner interest at the rate of 7% per annum on the sum of money
paid to the petitioner belatedly as rest of his retiral benefits on 04.02.2015
that is to say, for the period of 17.09.2009 to 04.02.2015. The said payment
shall be made as full and final settlement on the issue within a period of six
weeks from the date of communication of this order.
10. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.
11. Urgent photostat certified copies of this judgment may be delivered
to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of
all formalities.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)
S.M.
