Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Samir Kumar Singha Mahapatra vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 5 March, 2020

Author: Soumen Sen

Bench: Soumen Sen

                                          1


05.03.2020
 S/L No.11
Court No.16
   (gc)
                                     MAT 652 of 2019
                                          With
                                    CAN 10041 of 2019
                                          With
                                    CAN 10042 of 2019

                             Samir Kumar Singha Mahapatra
                                           Vs.
                               State of West Bengal & Ors.


                                Mr. Mahadeb Khan,
                                Mr. Tarapada Das
                                                                 ... for the Appellant.
                                Mr. Supriyo Chatterjee,
                                Ms. Anjusri Mukherjee
                                                                      ...for the State.

                                        Re: CAN 10041 of 2019

                    There is a delay of 201 days in preferring the appeal.

                    We have perused the application for condonation of delay. We

                are satisfied with the explanations offered for not being able to file

                the memorandum of appeal within the period of limitation.

                    On such consideration, the delay of 201 days in filing the

                memorandum of appeal is condoned.

                    CAN 10041 of 2019 is allowed.

                                         Re: MAT 652 of 2019
                                                With
                                          CAN 10042 of 2019

                    In spite of service, the Headmaster is not represented nor any

              accommodation is prayed for.
                                2


         The appeal is arising out of an order dated 7th September, 2018

passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the prayer of the appellant

for grant of interest due to delayed payment of provident fund was

spurned by the learned Single Judge.

         The appellant was an assistant teacher in a Government aided

recognized High School who retired on superannuation on 31st March,

2015. After superannuation, the pension payment order was issued by

the Director of Pension Provident Fund and Group Insurance after

completing all formalities and taking necessary steps by the concerned

District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Bankura and the retiral dues were

paid in favour of the appellant pursuant to the said pension payment

order.

         The grievance expressed by the appellant in this appeal as well as

in the writ petition is non-payment of interest due to delayed payment

of provident fund.      It appears that though the appellant retired on

superannuation on 31st March, 2015, the provident fund was released

in his favour on 20th August, 2018, after three years from the date of

retirement.

         On perusal of the previous order of the learned Single Judge

dated 31st July, 2018, it appears that the Headmaster of the concerned

school was responsible for the delay in releasing the provident fund by

the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Bankura.           The relevant

provident fund statement, which is required for payment of provident

fund, was not furnished by the Headmaster which caused delay in
                              3


releasing the provident fund. Since there was no fault attributable to

the concerned District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Bankura and other

State respondents, the prayer for grant of interest for delayed payment

of provident fund cannot be allowed for giving direction upon the State respondents to make payment of interest on such delayed payment of provident fund.

However, we deprecate the acts and actions on the part of the Headmaster of the concerned School in dealing with the issue relating to preparation of provident fund statement of the appellant. There is an order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 31st July, 2018 by which the direction was given upon the concerned District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Bankura to take steps against the Headmaster for his failure to prepare the provident fund statement of the appellant and forwarding the same to the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Bankura within time.

Considering the facts narrated in the order dated 31st July, 2018, we direct the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Bankura to deduct a sum of Rs.30,000/- from the salary of the Headmaster and remit the said amount by a cheque or a bank draft to the appellant within a period of fortnight from the date of communication of this order.

Upon payment of the said amount, i.e. Rs.30,000/-, the order of suspension passed by the competent authority in terms of the order of the learned Single Judge shall stand revoked and the Headmaster may be permitted to resume his duty in the concerned school. 4

With the above observation the appeal being MAT 652 of 2019 and the stay application being CAN 10042 of 2019 stand disposed of and the order of the learned Single Judge stands modified to the aforesaid extent.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.

(Soumen Sen, J.) (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)