Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tarapada Jana vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 31 July, 2017
Author: Samapti Chatterjee
Bench: Samapti Chatterjee
.7.2015
14 W.P. 13015(W) of 2015
Tarapada Jana
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Saibal Acharyya,
Mr. Pradip Paul
... for the Petitioner
Mr. Benazir Ahmed
... for the State
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a direction upon the respondent
authorities issued fresh Pension Payment Order by taking into consideration the petitioner's past service with effect from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 on the basis of the order passed on 23rd June, 2008 by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur whereby the petitioner's past service from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 was allowed to be treated as a continuation of service but with the condition that for that period that is to say 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 the petitioner will not get any pay protection or the petitioner will not claim any monetary benefits for that period. Only that period will be calculated for continuation of service. The petitioner retired from service on 31st August, 2008 but the petitioner's Pension Payment Order was prepared treating the petitioner's period of service as 25 years and 9 months without adding the period from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982. Therefore, hence the present writ petition.
As per direction of this Court, Mr. Benazir Ahmed, learned Advocate appearing for the State respondents, filed a report on behalf of the respondent no. 3, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal, which is taken on record and Mr. Ahmed placed paragraph nos. 8, 9 and 10 which are quoted below :
"8. District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Midnapore submitted to Directorate of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance the pension case of the petitioner vide Memo. No. 425-L dated 03.09.2013. It appears from pension papers (Part - 'B' and calculation sheet and Input Sheet) that service rendered for the period from 06.02.1976 to 06.11.1982 in Samchi Ventral School, Bhutan has not been taken into consideration for pensionary benefits though the same was allowed in the reasoned order dated 23.06.2008. District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Midnapore calculated the qualifying service for the period from 08.11.1982 to 31.08.2008 (i.e. 25 years 9 months 24 days) rendered in Basudevpur H.P. Institution in the District of Purba Medinipur.
9. In this context provision contained in rule 7(ii), Chapter - III of D.C.R.B. Scheme, 1981 vide G.O. No. 136-Edn(B) dated 15.05.1985 is hereby referred to.2
"Service rendered in other states shall not count as qualifying service. Services rendered in territories which have since been merged in West Bengal and service rendered in East Pakistan now Bangladesh upto 14.08.1947 shall however, count towards pension".
District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur, therefore, did not count the service in the school in Bhutan towards pension.
In this context decision taken on 14.12.2007 in Transfer Case (Civil) 106 of 2006 (Union of India - petitioner -vs- S. R. Dhingra and Others - Respondents) by the Hon'ble Justice A. K. Mathur and the Hon'ble Justice Markandey Katju of The Supreme Court of India may also be hereby referred to.
"It is well settled that a mistake does not confer any right to any party and can be corrected".
District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur corrected the mistake by excluding the period of service in the school in Bhutan.
10. District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur, therefore submitted the pension case of the petitioner to Directorate of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance not taking into account the period of service rendered in Samchi Central School, Bhutan keeping in view the relevant D.C.R.B. rule and the decision dated 14.12.2007 of the Supreme Court of India as mentioned above."
Mr. Saibal Acharyya, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the submissions of the respondent no. 3 has no relevance in respect of the present case as pursuant to the Hon'ble Court's order dated 9th January, 2008 passed in W.P. 27233(W) of 2007, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur vide his order dated 23rd June, 2008 already regularised the petitioner's past service with effect from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 as a continuation of service without giving any pay protection for that period. Mr. Acharyya further contends that the Memo dated 23rd June, 2008 issued by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur has not been challenged by the respondent authorities and, therefore, it is very much binding upon the parties. Not only that, this order was issued on 23rd June, 2008 and the Pension Payment Order was prepared on 13th February, 2015 by the concerned respondent i.e. respondent no. 3 thus deducting that period from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 treating the petitioner's entire period of service as 25 years and 9 months instead of more than 32 years.
Considering the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and after perusing the records, I am of the view that the impugned order dated 13th February, 2015 cannot be sustained in the eye of law, as the concerned District Inspector of Schools vide its order dated 23rd June, 2008 already regularised that period with petitioner's period of service without given any pay protection. That being the position, I am of the opinion that justice would 3 be sub-served if the respondent no. 4, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur, is directed to give hearing to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order and after hearing, add/ include the said period that is to say from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 with the petitioner's period of total service as has been already directed by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur vide his order dated 23rd June, 2008 as a continuation of service without any pay protection for that period and communicate the decision to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
Needless to mention that at the time of hearing the petitioner is at liberty to rely on the documents pertaining to the petitioner's case and also needless to mention that after giving hearing if it is found that the period of service that is to say from 6th February, 1976 to 8th November, 1982 has not been added with the petitioner's period of service, then the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur is directed to add/include the said period with the petitioner's total period of service on the basis of the order dated 23rd June, 2008 and thereafter prepare the pension papers and forward the same to the respondent no. 3, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal within two weeks and after receiving the same, the respondent no. 3 would issue fresh Pension Payment Order in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter.
With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent certified xerox copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.
( Samapti Chatterjee, J. ) AKD