Back
2024 Supreme(Cal) 1386
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
BISWAJIT BASU, J.
Jyoti Prasad Chatterjee – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal and Others – Respondents
W.P.A. No. 17577 of 2023
Decided On : 30-04-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Sakti Pada Jana, Subhajyoti Das.
For the Respondents: Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, Suman Dey.
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that family pension benefits for disabled children should not be denied based on the retirement date of the parent, promoting social justice.
Headnote:
Pension - Family Pension Eligibility - Memorandum dated September 05, 2005; Memorandum dated January 13, 2009 - The court interpreted the memoranda to extend family pension benefits to disabled children of retired employees, emphasizing socio-economic justice and the need for liberal construction of pension entitlements.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a blind son of a deceased teacher, sought family pension after his mother's death. His father's retirement before April 1, 1981 was cited as a reason for denial by authorities, despite the mother's receipt of family pension.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the memoranda did not justly restrict family pension eligibility based on the father's retirement date, especially given the mother's prior receipt of pension and the socio-economic context.
Issues: Whether a disabled child of a retired teacher, who retired before April 1, 1981, is entitled to family pension under the relevant memoranda.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the memoranda should be interpreted to favor the entitlement of disabled children to family pension, regardless of the father's retirement date, aligning with principles of social justice.
Result: The court set aside the denial of family pension and directed its grant to the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
BISWAJIT BASU, J.
1. Whether a disabled child of an approved teacher of Non Government/Aided educational institutions who retired prior to April 01, 1981 is entitled to family pension is the issue falls for consideration in the instant writ petition.
2. The father of the petitioner was an assistant teacher of Muktokeshi Gour Mohan Das High School, District-24 Parganas (South). On attaining the age of superannuation, he had retired from his service on March 31, 1981 and died on October 09, 1983.
3. The petitioner, being the 100% blind son of the deceased teacher, applied for grant of family pension after the death of his mother who was a family pensioner. A representation of the petitioner with the said prayer was pending before the Commissioner of School Education, West Bengal and the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), District-24 Parganas (South), the respondent nos. 2 and 4 herein respectively. The petitioner, alleging delay in disposal of the said representation had filed a writ petition being WPA 3414 of 2021 which was disposed of vide order dated February 09, 2021 directing the respondent no. 2 to consider the said prayer of the petitioner.
4. In compliance with the said direction, the respondent no. 2, by the order impugned dated September 02, 2021 has disposed of the said representation of the petitioner(annexed with the writ petition being Annexure ‘P11’) by rejecting his prayer for family pension, holding inter alia that the provisions of the Memoranda of the School Education Department, West Bengal bearing No. 325-SE(B) dated September 05, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the “Memorandum dated September 05, 2005”) read with 10-SE(B) dated January 13, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the “Memorandum dated January 13, 2009”) clearly specify that only the disabled children whose family are in receipt of pension/family pension under G.O. No. 136-Edn(B) dated January 15, 1985 (i.e. those employees who were in active service on or after April 1, 1981) would be eligible for family pension under the said memoranda.
5. Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, learned senior advocate for the petitioner submits that the benefit of family pension was extended to the disabled children of whole-time approved teaching and non-teaching staff of Non-Government/Aided educational institutions (hereinafter referred to as the “concerned Employees”) for life vide Memorandum dated September 05, 2005 and by the clarificatory Memorandum dated January 13, 2009, such benefit though was sought to be restricted to the children of such Employees who retired after April 01, 1981, but Paragraph 3 thereof clearly stipulates that the disabled children whose family are in receipt of pension/family pension are eligible to get family pension under the Memorandum dated September 05, 2005, the mother of the petitioner since was in receipt of such family pension, the respondent no. 2 is not justified in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that his father had retired prior to April 01, 1981.
6. He further submits that the issue as to whether the unmarried/ widowed daughter of concerned Employees who superannuated or died prior to the West Bengal recognized Non-Government Educational Institution Employees (Death-cum-Retirement benefit) scheme, 1981 (“DCRB Scheme, 1981” in short) coming into force, would be entitled to family pension was referred to the Special Bench of this Court in MAT No. 1518 of 2019 (State of West Bengal & Ors. vs. Sabita Roy). The Special Bench answered the reference in affirmative, therefore in terms of the ratio of law laid down in the said judgment, the respondent no. 2 has committed error in denying the prayer of the petitioner for family pension.
7. Mr. Vaisya, learned Additional Government Pleader, submits that in terms of Paragraph 2 of the clarificatory Memorandum dated January 13, 2009, the disabled children of only those Employees who retired after April 01, 1981 are eligible for family pension, but the father of the petiti
