Tapati Panda & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 7055 Cal

     12.10.23
30   Ct. No.25
      Sws.M
                                        WPA 28179 of 2022

                                       Tapati Panda & Ors.
                                                Vs.
                                  The State of West Bengal & Ors.

                        Ms. Mousumi Bhowal
                        Mr. S. Naskar
                                                      ....for the petitioners
                        Mr. Suddhadev Adak
                                                        ...for the WBMICAL

                        Mr. Avijit Tewary
                                                 ...for the respondent No. 6

Mr. Satyajit Mondal Mr. Amit Bikram Mahata

The petitioner No.1 claims to be the wife of the

deceased employee. The petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are the

sons of the deceased employee of West Bengal Minor

Irrigation Corporation Limited (WBMICL). The deceased

employee died-in-harness on March 21, 2010.

It is the petitioners' case that upon the death of

the first wife, the deceased employee married the

petitioner No.1. The deceased employee had 2 sons from

his first marriage. Out of the 2 sons, one son has

already passed away.

The second son is made a party respondent to the

present proceedings. As per the nomination form filed

by the deceased employee, the provident fund dues were

disbursed to the 2 sons from the first marriage.

Therefore, this Court is of the view that recovery, if

any of the proportionate share of the petitioners of the

provident fund dues will have to be adjudicated by the

appropriate civil forum, if appropriate proceedings are

filed and not by the writ court. The issue that remains

to be considered as on date relates to the family pension

payable to the petitioner No.1.

Pursuant to a judgment and decree dated June

30, 2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior

Division), Haldia in Title Suit No.132 of 2010, the

petitioner no.1 has been declared to be the legally

married wife of the deceased employee. The Petitioner

Nos. 2 and 3 are his children.

All the petitioners are declared to be the heirs of

the deceased employee.

It has also been held in TS 132 of 2010 that the

plaintiffs/the petitioners herein are entitled to

proportionate share of death benefits of the deceased

employee. The 2 sons by previous marriage were

restrained from misappropriating the proportionate

share of the plaintiff' dues.

It transpires that a hearing was given to the

petitioners by the Managing Director, WBMICL on

October 11, 2023. From the minutes dated August 17,

2023 it appears that a notice was given to the first wife

of the deceased employee. However, no one appeared on

behalf of the first wife.

The petitioner no.1 categorically stated that she

applied for family pension including the dues of the

death benefits of her husband. The Managing Director

appraised here and the other petitioners that not only

the PF dues but gratuity and leave salary have also been

disbursed to the nominees of the decreased employee.

The EPFO informed the corporation that family

pension is not been paid to any person because only the

legal wife of the deceased employee is entitled to receive

family pension. Since the petitioner was not enrolled as

the legal wife at any time by the deceased employee,

petitioner No. 1 was not being given the family pension.

Considering the rival submissions of the parties

and the materials placed on records, this Court is of the

view that the petitioner no.1 is being harassed

unnecessarily by the employer/WBMICL. The order of

the Civil Court dated June 30, 2018 clearly holds the

petitioner no.1 to be the legally married wife of the

deceased employee. After such declaration by the

appropriate Civil Court, how the Managing Director can

withhold the family pension of the petitioner No.1 is not

clear to this Court. It has also been categorically

recorded that no one appeared on behalf of the first wife

despite service being effected.

Today in Court the private respondent no.7 is

represented. It is submitted that the mother of the

private respondent is already dead, as was previously

submitted by the petitioners.

Therefore, to the mind of this Court there is no

impediment in grant of family pension to the petitioner

no.1.

The petitioner no.1 will be granted family pension

month by month starting from December 10, 2023. The

arrears of family pension will be paid to the petitioner

No.1 from March 22, 2010 (date subsequent to the date

of death of the deceased employee) along with interest

@6% per annum from March 22, 2010 till the disbursal

of the entire amount. The disbursal of the entire

amount will be made within a period of 2 months from

date. The employer/WBMICL will pay the interest on

the arrears of family pension to the petitioner no.1

within 2 months. All the necessary formalities will be

completed by the employer within one month from the

date of this order. Upon compliance of all the necessary

formalities for grant of family pension the RPFC will

disburse the arrears of family pension and also make

month by month payment of the same from December,

2023.

With the directions aforesaid, WPA 28179 of

2022 is disposed of.

All parties to act on the server copies of this

order duly downloaded from the official website of

this Hon'ble Court.

Urgent photostar certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of

necessary formalities.

(Lapita Banerji, J)