Subodh Chandra Das v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.
23.02.2026 Sl. No.77 Ct. No.14 ss
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P.A. No. 20600 of 2025 Subodh Chandra Das
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Arpita Saha ...for the Petitioner.
Ms. Bineeta Bhattacharjee ...for the State.
1.
Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.
2.
By the present writ petition the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent authorities for disbursement of interest on delayed payment of gratuity and arrear pension amount from the date following the date of retirement of the petitioner till the date of actual payment at the rate of 18% per annum.
3.
The petitioner contends that he joined as an Assistant Teacher in Guru Prosad Tola Primary School, Village Guruprosadtola, P.O. Chamagram, P.S. Baishnab Nagar, District Malda, who retired from service on superannuation on 31st October, 2010 as a Head Teacher of the said school. The pension payment order was issued in favour of the petitioner on 4th May, 2011. The gratuity and arrear pension was disbursed in favour of the petitioner on 1st June, 2011. However, no interest on the aforesaid amount
has been paid in favour of the petitioner. Hence this writ petition.
4.
Ms. Arpita Saha, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that there is a delay in disbursement of the gratuity and arrear pension amount and as such the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on the delayed payment of gratuity and arrear pension amount. She seeks for appropriate orders.
5.
Despite service, none appears on behalf of the State. 6.
Ms. Bineeta Bhattacharjee, learned advocate, who usually appears for the State, is requested to appear in this matter. Let her appointment be regularised by the competent authority.
7.
The petitioner is directed to hand over a copy of the writ petition along with the annexures to Ms. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate for the State. 8.
Ms. Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate for the State leaves the matter to the discretion of the Court. 9.
Though there is delay in making such claim, however, delay per se cannot defeat the valuable right of the petitioner. Relief may be granted to the writ petitioner in spite of the delay if it does not affect the right of third parties. (See: Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh reported in (2008) 3 SCC 648).
10. From the aforesaid contentions made in the writ petition, it is found that there is considerable delay in disbursement of the gratuity and arrear pension
amount. It is the bounden duty of the State to disburse all the pensionary benefits to the employee forthwith, failing which the employee is entitled to interest on the aforesaid amount.
11. Accordingly, respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and respondent no.3, the Treasury Officer, Malda-I, are directed to disburse the interest at the rate of @ 8% per annum on the gratuity and arrear of pension amount in favour of the petitioner by way of pensionary benefits from the date following the date of his retirement till the date of actual payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.
12. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and respondent no.3, the Treasury Officer, Malda-I, for necessary compliance.
13. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition being WPA 20600 of 2025 is disposed of.
14. Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.
15. Consequently, connected applications, if any, stand disposed of.
16. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated.
17. There shall be no order as to costs.
18. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities.
(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)