IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.
Krishna Guha - Appellant
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondent
W.P.A. 11614 of 2024
Decided On : 14-07-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of deceased employee's pension application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding entitlement under the pension scheme. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. court's interpretation of rights under the circular. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 25) |
| 4. final directions for pension disbursement. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.
Facts :
1. The deceased husband of the petitioner, viz. Arun Kumar Guha, since deceased was an employee of the Calcutta State Transport Corporation (CSTC). The deceased employee retired on February 28, 2001. The deceased employee died on February 4, 2010, the Death Certificate is available at page 26 to the writ petition.
2. During the tenure of employment of the deceased employee, the Death- cum-Retirement Benefit Scheme of CSTC (for short the DCRB-CSTC Scheme) was introduced in 1990. Such Scheme was amended from time to time. The first amendment was notified on January 4, 1994. The second amendment was on February 10, 1999, when the deceased employee was in employment. The third amendment was notified on March 5, 2002, after the retirement of the deceased employee. The said third amendment is the solitary consideration in the instant writ proceeding.
3. Following the said third amendment dated March 5, 2002 a circular was issued on April 23, 2002 at page 18 to the writ petition. The content of the said circular dated April 23, 2002 is quoted below.
“CIRCULAR
In pursuance of the kind directives of the Managing Director vide Memo No.002/806 dt. 22.03.2002, this is for information of all concerned that the following arrangements have been made towards distribution and receipt of Option Form for Pensions in terms of 3rd amendment of C.S.T.C. Employees‟ DCRB Regulation, 1990.
1) Option Forms will be distributed and received from 12 noon to 1 P.M. on all working days in the Central Pay Group Section, Head Quarters for the retired employees and others.
2) Forms in duplicate will be issued only to all those employees/retirees concerned who could not and/or did not exercise option or consent previously. Question of re- submission of Option by any one who has already submitted either option or consent would not arise as per provision of the 3rd amendment.
3) Shri Gopinath Halder, L.D.Clerk has been entrusted with the job for distribution and receipt of the Forms.
4) Last date of submission of Option Form is 4.6.2002 (upto 5 P.M.)”
4. By a letter dated December 29, 2000, Annexure-R1 at page 7 to the report in the form of affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 and 4, the deceased employee had informed his employer that, he did not exercise any option in terms of the DCRB Regulations, 1990. He did not submit any consent form in terms of the amended DCRB Regulations, 1998. He further declared that, he would not lodge any claim for pension in future in terms of DCRB Regulations, 1990. He also requested his employer to grant Gratuity under the Gratuity Act, 1972 as amended from time to time.
5. On May 22, 2002 the deceased employee after his retirement has submitted an option form, Annexure-P2 at page 19 to the writ petition, stating that he could not submit the relevant option form in terms of DCRB Regulations, 1990 during his employment, however, he submitted the option form in terms of the said third amendment of DCRB Regulations, 1990 following Sub-Clauses (1) and (2) to Clause 6 of the said third amendment circular.
6. Since no step was taken by CSTC, the deceased employee on July 13, 2009 submitted a representation, Annexure-P3 at page 21 to the writ petition with all the relevant documents. Since no step was taken, the petitioner being the widow of the deceased employee submitted a further representation dated January 20, 2014, Annexure-P5 at page 27 to the writ petition.
7. As the claim of the deceased employee nor of the petitioner was acceded to, the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following reliefs :
“a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus
Pension is a recognized right, and waiver of rights must be informed and conscious; prior undertakings do not negate rights established by subsequent regulations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Corporation cannot use financial burden as a ground for refusal to grant pensionary benefits, and that the Corporation's failure to implem....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to exercise the option to join a Pension Scheme, despite multiple opportunities, constitutes waiver of the right to claim benefits....
Failure to opt for the Contributory Provident Fund by the cut-off date leads to automatic inclusion in the Pension Scheme, creating a legal fiction preventing claims against this transition.
Pension is a right and not a bounty; delay in opting for pension benefits due to ignorance or miscommunication does not bar entitlement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioner to pension benefits under the PF and Pension Circular No. 8/2010, based on the exercise of options and the bank's....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.