Maya Thapa v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS

Circuit Bench of Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri 10.05.2022 Bd.

W.P.A. 483 of 2022 Maya Thapa -vsThe State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Anirban Chakraborty ....for the petitioner.

Mr. Pretam Das ....for the State.

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court is kept with the record.

Petitioner is the wife of the deceased teacher who retired on 31st October,2008. After superannuation of the husband of the petitioner Pension payment order was issued in his favour vide Memo dated 3rd December,2008 thereby retiral dues including gratuity were released in his favour.

Subsequently, husband of the petitioner died on 29th September, 2017.

Petitioner claims interest on gratuity which has been belatedly released in her favour.

State respondents are represented by Mr.

Pretam Das, learned advocate.

The entitlement of the writ petitioner to interest on delayed payment of gratuity due to superannuation has already been decided in the writ petition being W.P.No.4600(W) of 2019

(Rabindra Kumar Bhattacharjee vs State of West Bengal and Ors.) wherein upon placing reliance on judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh, reported in (2008) 8 SCC 648 on condoning delay in approaching the Court for payment of interest on gratuity the said writ petition was allowed by extending the benefit on delayed payment of gratuity upon due consideration of the fact that there is no accrual of third party interest and matter relates to payment of retiral dues. Taking note of the observations made by the coordinate Bench in the order dated 17th April, 2019 passed in W.P. No. 4600(W) of 2019 (Rabindra Kumar Bhattacharjee vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.) this Court finds it apposite to grant interest on gratuity to the writ petitioner due to delay in releasing the said amount.

Accordingly, the Director of Pension Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal and the concerned Treasury Officer are directed to pay interest at the rate of Rs.8% per annum to the writ petitioner on gratuity from the date following the date of death of the husband of the petitioner till the date of actual disbursement of the gratuity amount, within a period of eight

weeks from the date of communication of this order.

Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

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.)