Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Satyabrata Bhattacharya vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 9 September, 2022
Court No. 22 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
09.9.2022 Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
(Item No. 6)
Appellate Side
(AB)
W.P.A. 545 of 2021
Sri Satyabrata Bhattacharya
VS
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Bratin Kumar Dey
Ms. Anjana Banerjee
.... For the petitioner
Ms. Kakali Samajpaty
Ms. Debarati Bairagi
Mr. Pramit Chakraborty
.... For the State
The petitioner was the Teacher-in charge at
Taki Government High School, Taki, North 24 Pgs.
The petitioner retired from his service on October 31,
2010. There was no legal proceeding or disciplinary
proceeding pending against the petitioner. The
petitioner claims that, he had complied with all the
formalities for receiving his retiral benefits. The
gratuity and commuted pension to which the
petitioner was entitled to receive and was eligible
immediately upon his retirement was received by him
in delayed manner of a substantial period of time.
The petitioner claims interest on such delayed
payment of gratuity and commuted pension from the
date of his retirement till the same is paid actually.
This writ petition has been filed to ventilate the
above grievance before this Court.
Ms. Kakali Samajpati, learned State counsel
appears and submits that, the petitioner is not
entitled to receive interest. The State employer,
2
according to her submission, first needs to ascertain
on whose part the delay had occurred before
adjudication of this writ petition. According to the
learned State counsel this writ petition is a delayed
writ petition and was filed about eleven years after
retirement.
The learned State counsel placed reliance a
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter
of United of India & Ors. Vs. Tarsem Singh reported
in (2008) 8 Supreme Court Cases 648, the said
judgment will be considered at the time of disposal of
the writ petition on the next occasion.
After considering the rival contentions of the
appearing parties and on perusal of materials on
records, this Court is of the view that, it is the settled
law that, right of a retired employee to get his/her
retiral dues on the date of attaining superannuation is
a valuable right which accrues in his/her favour on
the date of his/her attaining superannuation/
retirement. However, gratuity and pension are no
more considered to be a bounty to be handed out by
the State at its will and whim. An employee has a
statutory right to receive gratuity and pension upon
retirement. If payment of such gratuity and pension
is delayed, the retired employee is surely eligible to get
interest for such delayed payment.
The respondent No. 2, in view of the above, is
directed to furnish a report by way of a supporting
affidavit before this Court computing the quantum of
interest to be payable to the petitioner on the delayed
payment of gratuity and commuted pension when the
matter will be taken up next. The calculation of
interest shall commence from the date of retirement of
the petitioner i.e. on October 31, 2010 taking into
account the prevailing rate of interest on that day at
which a nationalized bank used to give interest in a
savings account till August 31, 2022. The further
interest till date of actual payment shall be taken care
of after such report comes.
The respondent No. 2 is directed to file such
report with a supporting affidavit disclosing the entire
arithmetical calculation on the basis whereof he will
arrive at the figure on account of interest component
on the delayed payment of gratuity and commuted
pension as claimed by the petitioner. Such affidavit
shall be filed by the respondent No. 2 containing his
report on or before September 21, 2022.
The writ petition shall appear under the
heading "For Orders" on September 23, 2022.
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)
