Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Gour Chandra Ghosh vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 3 October, 2013
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
03.10.2013.
ap W. P. 30830 W) of 2013
Gour Chandra Ghosh
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Goutam Kumar Maity
... For the petitioner.
Mr. Kaushik Ch. Gupta
... For the State.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today be taken on record.
At the outset, the learned advocate for the petitioner submits that his client
does not wish to press for interest on delayed payment of gratuity in respect of the
first Pension Payment Order which was issued in his favour. As such, the prayer for
interest on delayed payment of gratuity in respect of the first Pension Payment Order
stands rejected.
After considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the
parties and upon perusing the instant writ petition, it appears that the principal
grievance of the writ petitioner is delayed payment of gratuity by the State, on the
basis of his second Pension Payment Order.
It appears that this matter is squarely covered by a recent decision of this
Court rendered in the case of Mohan Ch. Halder & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal &
Ors. in W.P. 30264 (W) of 2008 along with several other writ petitions on 14th May,
2009.
I am of the view that similar directions can be given in the instant writ
petition, as directed by this Court in Mohan Ch. Halder's case. I, therefore, dispose
of the instant writ petition by directing the Director of Pension and Provident Fund
and Group Insurance to pay interest at the rate of 10% on the gratuity amount to be
computed from the date of coming into force of the relevant notification entitling the
petitioner to get revised pension, uptil the date on which the gratuity amount was
disbursed in terms of the second Pension Payment Order. However, in the event
there is any material before the said authority that because of any wilful laches on
the part of the concerned employee in receiving the gratuity amount or the
disbursement of gratuity was held up for some specific negligent acts on the part of
the claimant and the said sum could not be paid on the date of superannuation or at
any later date, then it would be permissible for the said authority to decline payment
of interest. But before finally deciding this issue, an opportunity of hearing shall be
given to the writ petitioner and the reason shall be disclosed as to why the interest on
gratuity is not being paid in his case. In the event there is any disciplinary
proceeding pending against the petitioner, then also the authorities would be entitled
to withhold the payment of gratuity.
The respondent authorities are accordingly directed to release
interest on delayed payment of gratuity to the petitioner to be computed from the date of coming into force of the relevant notification entitling the petitioner to get revised pension, uptil the date of disbursement of gratuity in terms of the second Pension Payment Order.
Such payment shall be made within ninety days from the date of communication of this order. In the event the authorities, for reasons indicated above, decide not to pay the interest to the writ petitioner, he shall be informed in writing, within thirty days from the date of communication of this order, the reason as to why such interest would not be paid and thereafter the procedure directed above shall be followed.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.)