Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Niranjan Bhowmik vs The District Inspector Of Schools ... on 20 December, 2017
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
20-12-2017 Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Subrata
.
W.P.No.27975(W) of 2013 Sri Niranjan Bhowmik
-vs-
The District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) of District - Paschim Medinipur & Ors.
with
WP No.38263(W) of 2013
Mr. Uttam Majumder
Mr. Purnasis Bhuniya ...for the petitioner
None ...for the respondents
Despite service of notice received by the office of the Government Pleader of High Court at Calcutta on December 18, 2017 with reference to the case which is taken on record, none to represent the respondents.
Be that as it may, the matter is taken up for hearing at the instance of Mr Majumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr Bhuniya appearing for the petitioner, who by handing over a copy of memo no.139/LS dated December 9, 2016 written by the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Howrah addressed to the learned State Advocate, Calcutta High Court referring submission of pension file of the petitioner, Ex-Assistant Headmaster, Baiman Bamandas High School, Howrah to the Director of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance, West Bengal for necessary action towards according sanction, submitted that despite such communications about a year back, the writ petitioners, 2 who retired on February 29, 2008, has not only been favoured with monthly pension due to him but also the amount as due to him towards provident fund, gratuity and group insurance have not yet been released.
Although in the instant case, no affidavit-in- opposition was ever exercised by the respondents, but it appears from an order dated December 20, 2016 about the submission on behalf of the State that the retirement benefits might have been withheld due to overdrawal and non-availability of service book of the incumbent.
This is unfortunate that the incumbent would have been held responsible for non-availability of the service book. In other way, had there been any fault on the part of the incumbent for any amount overdrawn, the concerned drawing and disbursement officer ought to have been vigilant to regularise the same at the earliest opportunity, either before his retirement or soon thereafter, especially when the writ petitioner retired in the month of February 2008. On the contrary, the retired petitioner is to knock the door of the court year to year for having pensionary benefits.
Be that as it may, from the last correspondence referred to above, it appears that the matter might have been pending before the Director of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance, West Bengal for according sanction which is expected to have been done by this time; and if it is not, the court directs to complete the exercise within a period of one month from the date of 3 communication of this order, failing which the Director, Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance shall appear in person before this court with the concerned documents to satisfy the court about the reason what for the sanction towards release of the amount towards provident fund, gratuity and group insurance could not be effected in favour of the petitioner and as to why the monthly pension could not be ordered by the authority.
Therefore, let the matter do appear on February 15, 2018 giving liberty to serve a server copy of this order to the Director of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance and the authority shall act on the same as directed above on the server copy, so to be communicated along with copy of the letter dated December 14, 2016 under reference.
Certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties.
[Mir Dara Sheko, J] 4