Amitava Musib v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.
11 06.02.2023 WPA 28518 OF 2022 AB Ct. no.22 -------------- Amitava Musib Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sourav Mitra Ms. Sreyasree Choudhury.
.... For the Petitioner Mr. Prantik Garai .... For the State Affidavit-of-service, filed in Court today, is taken on record.
The petitioner claimed to be an Assistant Teacher for the subject - Work Education at Pallibharati Tilaboni High School, District - Bankura. The petitioner retired on November 30, 2020 and since then he has not been receiving his pension and connected retiral benefits. The petitioner made his representation dated September 22, 2022, Annexure - P-8 appearing at page 31 to the writ petition. The said representation has not yet received any attention of the appropriate State authority. Relying upon the documents at pages 25 to 30 to the writ petition, Mr. Sourav Mitra, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that all these documents support the case of the petitioner that he would receive pension in terms of the Post Graduate scale from November 22, 1993 as evident from page 25, Annexure P-4 to the writ petition .
Mr. Mitra also drew attention of this Court to Annexure - P3 at page 15 to the writ petition learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner duly applied on February 12, 2021 to receive his pension through epension application. Mr. Prantik Garai, learned advocate appeared fro the respondent nos. 1 to 7.
Considering the submissions made on behalf of the appearing parties and on perusal of the materials on record to subserve justice, the respondent no.2 is directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner as made out in his representation dated September 22, 2022, Annexure - P-8 to the writ petition at page 31 thereto upon giving at least seven days' prior hearing notice to the petitioner and then after granting him an opportunity of hearing shall decide the issue with a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.
The entire exercise, as directed above, shall be carried out and completed by the respondent no.2 positively within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
While considering the issue the respondent no.2 shall consider the documents at pages 25 to 30 of the writ petition and their applicability on the case made out by the petitioner. The respondent no.2 shall also consider the objections and its tenability raised by
the said authority appearing at pages 25 to 30 to the writ petition.
It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim of the petitioner in any manner and the petitioner will be at liberty to urge whatever points he wishes to urge by relying upon whatever records and documents he wishes to rely upon before the respondent no.2.
Since affidavits are not called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.
It is made clear further that the respondent no.2 shall pass its reasoned decision in accordance with law. After the reasoned decision is arrived at by the respondent no.2, the respondent no.2 then shall communicate the same to the petitioner and the respondent no.6 positively within a further period of two weeks from the date of the said reasoned decision and the respondent no.6 then in turn shall issue the necessary Pension Payment Order (PPO) in favour of the petitioner positively within a period of seven working days after receiving the reasoned decision from the respondent no.2.
The respondent no.6 then shall send the PPO to the respondent no.8, who in turn shall disburse and pay the pension and allied retiral benefits to the petitioner in
accordance with law positively within a period of two weeks after receiving the PPO from the respondent no. 6. On the above terms this writ petition, WPA 28518 of 2022 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.
Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously.
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)