Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Kumari Bijalika Jana vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 September, 2013
Author: Debasish Kargupta
Bench: Debasish Kargupta
1
17.09.2013.
Sl No.277.
S.D.
W.P. No. 21516 (W) of 2013
Kumari Bijalika Jana
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Saktipada Jana
....For the Petitioner.
Mr. M.A. Samad
Mr. Soumik Biswas
....For the Respondent No. 8.
Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya Mr. Bidhan Biswas ...For the Respondent No. 3.
Mr. Mahadeb Khan ....For the State.
Let the affidavit of service filed be kept on record. Let the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 3 showing cause in compliance of the order dated September 04, 2013 be also kept on record. After perusing the above affidavit of compliance, I find that the respondent no. 3 sent back the claim of the petitioner to the respondent no. 4 with a relevant papers under his Memo No. 328A/DPPG., dated September 05, 2011. Considering the above fact, I am of the opinion that the respondent no. 3 did not sit tight over the matter. 2 So far as the cause of action involved in the writ application is concerned, decision with regard to payment of family pension to the petitioner arising out of the service of her deceased father, namely late Bhabataran Jana. Late Bhabataran Jana was an approved non‐teaching staff (Clerk) of Nachinda Jiban Krishna High School, District - Purba Medinipur. He retired from the above service with effect from November 30, 1977 on attaining the age of retirement on superannuation. He enjoyed the family pension till his death on November 23, 1992. The above benefit was extended in favour of his widow (mother of the petitioner). The mother of the petitioner breathed her last on July 10, 2010. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application for extending the above benefit in her favour. The respondent no. 4 sanctioned the above pension in favour of the petitioner and sent the relevant papers to the respondent no. 3 for releasing the above amount in favour of the petitioner. From the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 3, I find that all those papers were sent back to the respondent no. 3 with the observation that the same was not payable to the petitioner in accordance with the Provisions of the West Bengal Recognized Non‐Government Aided Educational Institution Employees (Death cum Retirement Benefit) Scheme, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme, 1981).
3For examining the decision making process of the respondent no. 3, the Provisions of paragraph 28 of the said Scheme of 1981 is set out below:‐ "28. Pension payable to one member of the family‐ Subject to the provision contained in the note under paragraph 26, the pension awarded under this scheme shall not be payable to more than one member of the employee's family at the same time. It shall first be admissible to the widow's)/widower and then to the first eldest minor son, thereafter next minor sons according to seniority and when there will be no minor son, eldest minor daughter and so on and thereafter to mother and lastly to father. Payments to minor will be made through natural legal guardian."
After perusing the above Provisions, I find that the family pension under the said Scheme of 1981 is payable in favour of one family member of the deceased approved teaching or non‐teaching staff of a Recognized Non‐Government Aided Educational Institution at a time. It was paid to the mother of the petitioner in the capacity of widow of the deceased recognized Non‐teaching staff. With the death of the mother of the petitioner, the extension of the benefit of the above Scheme came to an end. The above benefit was not a benefit to be enjoyed as a right of inheritance. The above benefit was extended under the said Scheme of 1981. Therefore, there was no scope for extending the benefit to another family member of the concerned deceased non‐teaching staff after enjoying that benefit by the widow of the non‐teaching staff concerned.
This writ application is, therefore, dismissed.
4There will, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
( Debasish Kar Gupta, J. )