Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ajit Kumar Mandal vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 May, 2023
04. 17.05.2023
bd. Ct.15 W.P.A. 3559 of 2012
Ajit Kumar Mandal
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Kalyan Kumar Panda
... for the petitioner
Ms. Ananya Neogi
... for the State
Petitioner was an approved assistant teacher
in a Government aided high school who retired on
superannuation on 29th February, 2008. Petitioner
was accorded approval of appointment being a
bonafide organising teacher by the concerned
District Inspector of Schools (SE), Bankura, vide
memo dated 25th September, 2000 with effect from
1st May, 2000 upon granting recognition to the
school where petitioner was serving as organising
teacher. After discharging duty being an approved
assistant teacher for a period of seven years ten
months petitioner retired and thereafter paid all
other superannuation benefits excepting pension
since it was found by the department that service
rendered by the petitioner as an approved assistant
teacher is less than 10 years. A memo was issued
dated 25th September, 2008 without releasing
pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner.
Petitioner in the present writ petition
questions non-payment of pensionary benefit
ignoring the service rendered by him as an approved
assistant teacher with effect from 1st May, 2000 and
prior to that it has been submitted by the learned
2
advocate for the petitioner that petitioner rendered
service as an organising teacher in the school with
effect from 1972.
Petitioner has claimed sanction of pensionary
benefits taking into consideration service rendered
by the petitioner as an organising teacher prior to
grant of approval on 1st May, 2000 in order to fulfil
the condition of 10 years service as contained in
DCRB Scheme, 1981 which would entitle the
petitioner to receive pension. In support of such
contention learned advocate for the petitioner has
relied upon the judgments delivered by the Hon'ble
Single Bench and Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court.
State respondents are represented by learned
advocate who has made an attempt to defend the
stand taken by the State respondents in not
releasing pensionary benefits in favour of the
petitioner based on the provisions as contained in
DCRB, 1981.
Having considered the submissions made on
behalf of the respective parties the Principal
Secretary, School Education Department, being the
respondent no. 1 is directed to take decision on the
claim of the petitioner to grant pensionary benefits
within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of
receipt of comprehensive representation from the
petitioner. Petitioner is granted leave to make a
representation within a period of fortnight from this
date.
The Principal Secretary is directed to take
such decision after granting opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner or his representative and to pass
reasoned order. The reasoned order to be passed by
the Principal Secretary shall be communicated to
the petitioner within one week thereafter.
With the aforesaid directions the writ petition
stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order
as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual
undertakings.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
