Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Amitava Ghosh vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 November, 2022
16.11.2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
DL-8 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(PP) APPELLATE SIDE
Ct.21
WPA 16385 of 2021
Amitava Ghosh
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee,
Mr. Sudipta Nayan Ghosh
....for the petitioner.
Mr. Kallol Guha thakurata
....for the respondent nos.2, 4, 5 & 7.
By an order dated July 15, 2022, a coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court had directed the respondents concerned, being the Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation (in short "CMPFO") to file a report on affidavit to bring on record whether any departmental proceeding was initiated by the employer against the petitioner and the outcome of the said departmental proceedings. By an order dated June 24, 2022, the same coordinate Bench recorded that the issue whether the pendency of the criminal proceedings was a fault on the part of the petitioner, which would disentitle him to claim interest was required to be considered.
Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the report on affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents concerned. The same has been affirmed 2 by the Regional Commissioner - II, Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation (CMPFO) on August 18, 2022.
From the said report on affidavit, it appears that no averments have been made with regard to the initiation/pendency of the departmental proceedings against the petitioner. Neither was any rule/policy brought on record to show that the rule/policy of the employer disentitle the petitioner to claim interest on the retiral benefits due to the pendency of criminal proceedings against him.
Mr. Guha Thakurata, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of CMPFO/respondent nos.2, 4, 5 and 7 submits that the petitioner was put on suspension and that in effect evidenced the fact that the departmental proceedings were initiated against him. Furthermore, two criminal proceedings were initiated against him. CBI investigation was being made against the petitioner and, therefore, the payment of his retiral benefits along with interest thereon could not be considered by the employer/CMPFO.
Having considered the rival submissions of the parties and the materials placed on record, this Court finds that the employer has failed to bring on record either the pendency of the departmental proceedings 3 against the petitioner, which is initiated by way of filing a charge-sheet. Neither is the employer/ CMPFO able to show that from this extant rule/policy that the pendency of criminal proceedings without initiation of departmental proceedings would disentitle the petitioner from claiming his retiral benefits.
In the light of the discussions above, this Court directs the respondent no.2 to pay interest @ 6 % p.a. from May 1, 2013 (the date subsequent to the date of retirement) till May 31, 2022 (date of payment) in view of the recent judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court, reported in (2022) 4 SCC 627.
With the direction aforesaid, WPA 16385 of 2021 is disposed of.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon'ble Court.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Lapita Banerji, J.)