Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Sukumar Majumder & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 January, 2020
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
1
W. P. No.23758 (W) of 2019
Sri Sukumar Majumder & Ors.
v.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
17.01.2020 Mr. S.P. Pahari
Sl-170 Mr. Surendra Kumar Sharma ... for the petitioners.
Ct.15
(S.R.) Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay
Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal ... for the State respondents.
Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharyya Mr. Kuhal Das ... for the respondent nos.8 & 9.
Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners be kept on record. Records reveal that the widow of the deceased teacher approached this Court earlier by a writ petition being W.P. No.9271 (W) of 2016 claiming pensionary benefits of her husband, who had died-in-harness on 11th September, 1971. The said writ petition upon contested hearing was disposed of by an order dated 27th July, 2017 directing the respondent no.3 therein "to immediately reformulate the Non-Government College employees and Day Students Home Employees Death-cum-Retirement Benefits Scheme, 1981 on the same lines as the Scheme applicable to Non-Government Educational Institutions and Organizations under the DCRB Scheme, 1981 within three months of communication of this order." Pursuant to the said order, a notification was issued by the respondent no.6 on 21st December, 2018 observing inter alia that "Now, in compliance with the 2 solemn order of His Lordship the Hon'ble Justice I.P. Mukherji dated 27.7.2017, the Governor has been pleased to extend pensionary benefit under the said DCRB Scheme, 1981, to such widows/widower who died-in-harness while in service before 1.4.1974 and whose date of retirement (60 years) falls on or after 1.4.1974 but before issuance of a G.O. dated 23rd December, 1981. Other conditions in the said Government Order No.1955 Edn(CS) dated 23rd December, 1981 remain unchanged." In the midst thereof, the petitioners' mother expired.
Mr. Pahari, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased employee and that after issuance of the notification 21st December, 2018 follow up steps have not been taken and the dues have been illegally withheld. The respondent no.9 by a letter dated 12th April, 2019 has also requested the respondent no.2 to forward the relevant records pertaining to the petitioners' claim but in vain.
Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits, upon instruction, that for disbursement of the dues of the petitioners, the respondent no.2 by a letter dated 17th June, 2019 has requested the college authorities to submit the service book of the deceased employee and other relevant papers. However, the college authorities are yet to respond to the same. The respondent no 2 will process the petitioners' claim upon receipt of the documents from 3 the college authorities. Let the written instruction, as produced, be kept on record.
In the said conspectus, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the issue needs to be relegated to the respondent no.2 to take appropriate steps.
Accordingly, this Court directs the respondent no.2 to fix a date of hearing within four weeks from the date of communication of the order and to intimate such date to the petitioners and the college authorities. On the scheduled date, the college authorities shall produce all relevant service documents of the deceased employee including the documents, as sought for, by the respondent no.2 vide letter dated 17th June, 2019. The petitioners shall also appear before the respondent no.2 on the scheduled date along with all relevant documents.
Upon considering the documents, the respondent no.2 shall take all necessary steps towards disbursement of the dues in favour of the petitioners subject to compliance of other formalities, if any, by the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be 4 given to the learned advocates for the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)