Renu Hazra v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

09.02.2026 Ct. No.24 Sl. No.35 akd W. P. A. 2630 of 2025 [Smt. Renu Hazra -Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.] Mr. Bidhayak Lahiri ... ... for the petitioner Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee Mr. Satyaki Banerjee ... ... for respondent nos.3 to 5 [University of Calcutta] Mr. Swapan Kumar Datta .. ld. Govt. Pleader Mr. Dipankar Das Gupta ... ... for the State 1.

The reports filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 as well as respondent nos. 3 to 5 (University of Calcutta) are kept on record. The exceptions filed thereto on behalf of the petitioner are also kept on record.

2.

The petitioner is a disabled lady, whose father was employed as a sweeper in the University of Calcutta. The father expired some time in 1985. Since the expiry of the father, the mother of the petitioner had been receiving family pension. The mother expired in May, 2007. It was after the expiry of the petitioner's brother some time in 2017 that the petitioner had applied for obtaining family pension in 2019. The petitioner's request was not responded to in any manner whatsoever. 3.

Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee, learned Advocate appearing for the University of Calcutta submits that two principal issues were of concern, on account whereof the family pension could not be granted to the petitioner. The first of such concern was that the petitioner was receiving pension from the Health Department and thus could not receive a second pension from the Government. The second and more discerning concern is that

the petitioner's date of birth was reflected sometime in March, 1988, for which various documents have been relied upon by the State in its report filed before this Hon'ble Court, including a PAN card which discloses the date of birth as March, 1988. The father having expired in September, 1985, it was of concern to the authorities as to how the petitioner, born sometime in March, 1988 could claim to be the daughter of the said employee.

4.

On the contrary the petitioner has shown a birth certificate, obtained sometime in 2024, which marks the petitioner's date of birth as January 1, 1976 and the name of the father has been shown as 'Sakha Hazra', the deceased employee of the University.

5.

The petitioner is directed to make a representation to the respondent no.4 disclosing all documents relied upon in the writ petition, the reports filed by the authorities as well as those filed with the exceptions. Let such application be made to the respondent no.4 by February 28, 2026.

6.

The respondent no.4 will consider such documents upon giving a hearing to the petitioner or her duly authorized representative, since the petitioner is a disabled person. Such consideration will be heard and disposed of by March 20, 2026. 7.

The respondent no.4 will intimate to the petitioner and the respondent no.2, who will take consequential steps if the consideration is decided in favour of the petitioner by March 31, 2026.

8.

With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

9.

There shall be no order as to costs.

10.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)