Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Uma Prasad Halder vs State Of Wb & Ors on 24 March, 2015
82
AB
24.03.2015
Court No.27 W. P. 2495 (W) of 2004
Uma Prasad Halder
Vs
State of WB & Ors.
Mr. Tara Prasad Halder ...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Tara Prasad Halder appears for the writ
petitioner, but none appears to represent the State
Respondents.
Mr. Halder submits that the writ petitioner had retired as the bursar from the Behala College on January 31, 2003, but his retirement dues, namely, gratuity and commuted value of pension were not released by the concerned respondents and as such, the petitioner filed this writ petition in February, 2004.
He further submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner received the payment of gratuity and commuted value of pension and provident fund from the concerned respondents. However, the writ petitioner was entitled to claim interest against the State Respondents on account of delayed release of his said retirement dues.
Mr. Halder points out that by an order dated June 30, 2004, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed the concerned respondents to pass fresh pension order in favour of the writ petitioner by showing his admissibility to get the pension with effect from February 1, 2003 in lieu of May 1, 2003.
From the order dated June 30, 2004, it that it was held by the learned Single Judge, that the petitioner was entitled to get 18% interest on the arrear pension as well as gratuity, which was released to him belatedly with effect from the next date of retirement till actual payment and such payment should be made within six weeks from the date of the said order.
Mr. Halder submits that in terms of the said order dated June 30, 2004, the respondents have released the payment to the petitioner on account of 18% interest on the arrear pension as well as gratuity. However, the concerned respondents did not comply with the said order dated June 30, 2004 insofar as the same directed for issuance of fresh pension order in favour of the petitioner by showing his admissibility to get the pension with effect from February 1, 2003.
My attention is drawn to a subsequent order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on February 7, 2005 where it is recorded that the concerned respondents preferred an appeal against the said order dated June 30, 2004 insofar as the same directed for passing of a fresh order showing the admissibility of the petitioner to get the pension with effect from February 1, 2003 and in view of the pendency of the said appeal, the state Respondents did not comply with the said portion of the order dated June 30, 2004.
Mr. Halder submits that the said appeal filed by the respondents were numbered as M.A.T. 130 of 2005 and by an order dated July 18, 2013 the Division Bench of this Court dismissed the said appeal being M.A.T. 130 of 2005. Copy of the said order dated July 18, 2013 produced by Mr. Halder be kept on record.
In view of the dismissal of the said appeal being M.A.T. 130 of 2005 by the Division Bench of this Court as stated above, Mr. Halder submits that the respondents are now bound to comply with the said direction contained in the said order dated June 30, 2004 and pass a fresh pension order in favour of the petitioner by showing his admissibility to get the pension with effect from February 1, 2003.
I find substance in such submission of Mr. Halder and direct the respondents to pass a fresh pension order in favour of the petitioner by showing his admissibility to get the pension with effect from February 1, 2003. Such fresh order shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner within May 15, 2015.
The petitioner is directed to communicate this order, together with the copies of all the other orders passed in this writ petition and the appellate court order dated July 18, 2013 to all the respondents, within April 07, 2015, by way of personal service.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition being W. P. 2495 (W) of 2004 stands disposed of.
However, there will be no order as to costs. Urgent Photostat Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously to the petitioner after complying with all necessary legal formalities.
(Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)