SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Cal) 214

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
AMRITA SINHA, J.
Pranesh Kumar Kar – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others – Respondents
W.P.A. No. 7576 of 2022
Decided on : 19-05-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sudipa Biswas, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Debasish Basu, Advocate.

Retired employees have a statutory right to receive gratuity and pension upon retirement, and are entitled to interest for delayed payment, unless the delay is attributable to the employee.

Headnote:

Retirement Benefits - Delayed Payment - Statutory Right to Receive Gratuity and Pension - Entitlement to Interest

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, retired from service and claimed interest on delayed payment of gratuity and arrear pension amount.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the retired employee is entitled to interest for delayed payment of gratuity and pension, as it is a valuable right accruing on the date of retirement and a statutory entitlement.

Issues: Delayed payment of retirement benefits, entitlement to interest, responsibility for delay

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that gratuity and pension are not discretionary but statutory rights, and the state is obliged to disburse them on time. The retired employee is entitled to interest for delayed payment, unless the delay is attributable to the employee.

Final Decision: The court directed the Treasury Officer to pay interest to the petitioner at the rate of 5% per annum on the gratuity and arrear pension, provided the delay was not attributable to the petitioner. The concerned authority was also directed to take appropriate steps against the erring officer(s) responsible for the delay.

JUDGMENT :

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record.

2. The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher who retired from service on 31.10.2020. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Pension Payment Order was issued on 28.02.2022 and the gratuity and arrear pension amount was disbursed on 11.03.2022. The petitioner claims interest on delayed payment of the gratuity and arrear pension amount.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considered the orders passed by this court in similar facts.

4. It is settled law that the right of a retired employee to get his retiral dues on the date of attaining superannuation is a valuable right which accrues in his favour on the date of his attaining superannuation. Further, gratuity and pension are no more considered to be a bounty to be handed out by the State at its whim. An employee has a statutory right to receive gratuity and pension upon retirement. If payment of such gratuity and pension is delayed the retired employee is surely entitled to get some interest for such delayed payment.

5. In the present case, it was the bounden duty of the State to disburse the gratuity and pension amount on the due date. If it has failed to do so and has released such amount after unexplained delay, it is obliged to pay interest to the retired employee. Pension and gratuity are welfare provisions aimed at maintaining the life of a retired employee and his/her dependents. This is compensatory in nature.

6. In view of the aforesaid, I direct the concerned Treasury Officer to pay interest to the writ petitioner at the rate of 5% per annum on the gratuity and arrear pension calculated on and from the due date till the date of actual payment, provided the delay caused was not attributable to the petitioner.

7. The Treasury Officer shall not be obliged to pay interest if the delay was caused on account of any lapse on the part of the teacher.

8. Such payment is to be made within eight weeks from the date of communication of the certified copy of this order to the concerned authorities.

9. The concerned respondent authority is directed to take appropriate steps in accordance with law against the erring officer(s) for whose fault there has been delay in releasing the retirement benefit to the petitioner.

10. Since no affidavit in opposition has been invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not be admitted.

11. The writ petition stands disposed of.

12. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top