Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI, J.
Md. Sayed - Petitioner
Versus
State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. No.7703(W) of 2016
Decided On : 15-12-2016
PENSION - WITHHOLDING - [WEST BENGAL RECOGNIZED NON-GOVERNMENT EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (DEATH-CUM-RETIREMENT BENEFITS) SCHEME, 1981] - Where the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal has found that there was no objection against the petitioner and further that there was a “No Liability Certificate” from the management of the Madrasah in the P.P.O. there was no indication for deduction due to any liability or any other cause, the District Inspector of Schools cannot refuse grant of clearance certificate to the petitioner or can withhold the pensionary benefit to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, an Assistant Headmaster of Malda Model Madrasah, was appointed as Headmaster and superannuated on 31st January, 2016. He duly filled up his pension booklet, submitted the same to the appropriate authority, and fulfilled all formalities to avail pensionary benefits. The Secretary of the Madrasah also forwarded the application for final withdrawal of provident fund money. However, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda, refused to issue a clearance certificate for drawing pension and other retirement benefits, despite receiving a “No Liability Certificate” from the school authority and the Pension Payment Order (P.P.O.) from the Director of Pension Provident Fund and Group Insurance (Branch Office).
Finding of the Court:
1. The petitioner has a right to arrear salaries, provident fund money, and pensionary benefits, which are his property. The District Inspector of Schools, being the drawing and disbursing officer, was under an obligation to release the same. 2. The District Inspector of Schools cannot withhold the petitioner’s pensionary benefits on the ground that the petitioner was involved in misappropriation of Government fund, as the allegations were not proved and no disciplinary action was contemplated during the petitioner’s service tenure. 3. The authorities are not entitled to withhold pension and other retiral benefits of the petitioner, as per the West Bengal Recognized Non-Government Educational Institutions (Death-Cum-Retirement Benefits) Scheme, 1981. 4. The Memo dated 2nd March, 2016 issued by the District Inspector of Schools is illegal and liable to be set aside.
Issues: 1. Whether the District Inspector of Schools can refuse to issue a clearance certificate for drawing pension and other retirement benefits to the petitioner, despite receiving a “No Liability Certificate” from the school authority and the Pension Payment Order (P.P.O.) from the Director of Pension Provident Fund and Group Insurance (Branch Office). 2. Whether the District Inspector of Schools can withhold the petitioner’s pensionary benefits on the ground that the petitioner was involved in misappropriation of Government fund.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, West Bengal has found that there was no objection against the petitioner and further that there was a “No Liability Certificate” from the management of the Madrasah in the P.P.O. there was no indication for deduction due to any liability or any other cause, the District Inspector of Schools cannot refuse grant of clearance certificate to the petitioner or can withhold the pensionary benefit to the petitioner. 2. The allegations against the petitioner were not proved, and no disciplinary action was contemplated during the petitioner’s service tenure. Therefore, the authorities are not authorized by law to withhold the pension of the petitioner. 3. According to paragraph 19(5) of the Pension Scheme of 1981, the eligibility and the entitlement to pension can be reduced or withheld on certain grounds, but such corruption has to be proved, which is mandatory under the aforesaid scheme. In the present case, there was no disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner, and the allegations of corruption leveled against him cannot be automatic. In the absence of proof, no penal action can be taken against the petitioner by way of withholding pension and other retiral benefits.
Final Decision: 1. The writ petition is allowed. 2. The Memo dated 2nd March, 2016 issued by the District Inspector of Schools is set aside and quashed. 3. The District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda, is directed to issue a clearance certificate in favor of the petitioner within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. 4. The District Inspector of Schools and the Treasury Officer are directed to pass necessary orders for making payment of arrear salaries and other retiral benefits to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of issuing the clearance certificate.
Sahidullah Munshi, J.
This writ petition is directed against a purported refusal of the respondent no.5, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda, to issue clearance certificate for drawing pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioner despite receiving “No Liability Certificate” from the school authority and despite the fact that the Pension Payment Order (hereinafter referred to as P.P.O.) from the respondent no.3, Director of Pension Provident Fund and Group Insurance (Branch Office) has already been issued.
2. In the writ petition following case has been made out :
a. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher at Malda Model Madrasah (H.S.), in the Town of Malda in the year 1982 and, thereafter he was appointed in the post of Assistant Headmaster on and from 1st October, 1996. His such appointment was approved by the concerned authority.
b. Subsequently, the petitioner was appointed in the post of Headmaster of the said Madrasah wherefrom he was superannuated on and from 31st January, 2016.
c. The petitioner duly filled up his pension booklet and submitted the same to the appropriate authority much prior to his retirement and according to him, he duly discharged all his formalities in time to avail the pensionary benefits including gratuity, provident fund and/or commuted value of pension as per provision laid down in the Government orders.
d. The Secretary of the Madrasah also duly forwarded the application together with all relevant papers of the petitioner for final withdrawal of provident fund money with interest vide Memo No.MM-29/2015 dated 10th December, 2015.
e. The petitioner’s name was deleted from the list of teachers’ monthly salary details for the month of December, 2015 in online salary management system and after he came to know the said fact he wrote letters to the respondent no.5, District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda to insert his name for the month of December, 2015 in the online salary management system, but to no effect for the reasons best known to the said respondent no.5.
f. The petitioner retired from the post of Headmaster of the Madrasah on 31st January, 2016 upon attaining the age of superannuation and the respondent no.7, the Managing Committee, Malda Model Madrasah (H.S.), issued “No Liability Certificate” in favour of the petitioner.
g. Upon verification of the petitioner’s service records P.P.O. has been issued by the respondent no.3, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance (Branch Office) vide Memo No. U/S/00161/020/2016 dated 1st February, 2016 thereby sanctioning the amount of pension, gratuity and commuted value of the pension payable to the petitioner.
h. Immediately after receiving the P.P.O. petitioner duly appeared before the concerned Treasury Officer and, ultimately, the petitioner submitted original “No Liability Certificate” together with a copy of the P.P.O. in the office of the respondent no.5, District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda on 11th February, 2016 to obtain the clearance certificate for drawing pension, but the same was not done.
3. Arrear salaries, provident fund money, pensionary benefits including gratuity are the property of the petitioner. The respondent no.5 is the drawing and disbursing officer of grant-in-aid of the Madrasah in question and being pension sanctioning authority he was under obligation to release arrear salaries, provident fund along with other retirement benefits. The petitioner is deprived as the respondent/District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Malda, has withheld the above-mentioned payments and the same is violative of the provisions of the pension scheme.
4. The petitioner made a representation on 17th February, 2016 before the respondent no.5 but he did not take any steps to make payment of arrear salaries for release of provident fund and also has not issued clearance certificate, on the contrary, vide his Memo No.315 dates 2nd March, 2016, directed the petitioner to move before the res
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
