IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
GAURANG KANTH, J.
Bhola Banshfore – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 24132 of 2024
Decided On : 12-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner’s service history and retirement benefits. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments supporting the petitioner's entitlement to retirement benefits. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. respondent's defenses regarding the status of the petitioner’s post. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 19) |
| 4. court's analysis on the validity of the petitioner’s appointment. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. court's ruling on pension rights. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 6. final orders of the court. (Para 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
Gaurang Kanth, J.
1. The Petitioner, through the present Writ Petition, seeks a direction upon Respondent No. 2 (Director of Local Bodies) and Respondent No. 4 (Chairman, Baidyabati Municipality) to approve his service profile in the IOSMS portal for the purpose of pay fixation and to release his final pension along with other retirement benefits. The Petitioner superannuated from service on 30.11.2022 while holding the post of Road Coolie under Baidyabati Municipality.
2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:
3. The Petitioner was appointed as a Cleaner/Road Coolie by the Respondent Municipality pursuant to Resolution No. 8 dated 24.03.1984, with effect from 01.04.1984, on a pay scale of Rs. 220-5-260-6-308-7-364/-. His services were subsequently confirmed with effect from 01.06.1985, vide Resolution No. 18 dated 30.05.1985. Thereafter, his pay scale was revised to Rs. 800-15-920-18-1118-21-1265/-. The Petitioner opted for the revised pay scale of Rs. 2600-4175/- w.e.f. 01.04.1996 in terms of the 4th Pay Commission, as per Notification No. 69/MA/0/C-92-P-19/38 dated March 1999, and his pay was fixed at Rs. 3105/-. In terms of paragraph 2(3) of Resolution No. 15/C-19/M.M-3/81 dated 20.04.1982, the Petitioner enjoyed the higher scale of pay for 18 years, and his pay was re-fixed at Rs. 3445/- w.e.f. 01.02.2002. Upon implementation of ROPA-2009, his salary was re-fixed at Rs. 7884/-, and a salary certificate to that effect was issued by the Chairman, Baidyabati Municipality, on 27.01.2010.
4. After serving for 36 years, the Chairperson of the Municipality, vide letter dated 19.02.2022, informed the Petitioner that, in terms of Section 58 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993, he would superannuate on 30.11.2022. Accordingly, the Petitioner retired from service on that date. However, till date, neither pension nor other retirement dues have been released in his favour.
5. The Chairman, Baidyabati Municipality, vide Memo No. 3431/B-16 dated 05.03.2024, forwarded the Petitioner’s service file to the Director of Local Bodies, for verification and fixation of pay. In response, the Director of Local Bodies, vide Letter No. 1098/DLB/B-504/10-2009 dated 29.07.2024, stated that the Petitioner's service profile had not been approved in the IOSMS portal. Consequently, the Director requested the Municipality to submit the service book of the Petitioner after securing iOSMS approval.
6. Since his retirement on 30.11.2022, the Petitioner has not received his pension or any other retirement benefits. He accordingly submitted a representation on 30.08.2024 to the concerned authorities. However, no reply has been received yet. Aggrieved by the inaction and delay on part of the Respondents, the Petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court through the present Writ Petition seeking appropriate reliefs.
7. An Affidavit-in-Opposition/Report has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 2 (Director of Local Bodies), to which the Petitioner has filed his response. However, no Affidavit-in-Opposition has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 4 (Chairman, Baidyabati Municipality).
Submission on behalf of the Petitioner
8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has rendered 36 years of unblemished service with the Respondent Municipality. His initial appointment, subsequent pay enhancements, and all other service- related financial benefits were duly recorded in his service book, and veri
Pension and retirement benefits are vested rights that cannot be arbitrarily denied, and delay in their release undermines the dignity of retired employees.
Pension and retirement benefits are vested rights accrued from service; denial based on unapproved appointment contrary to established law and unjustified by factual evidence.
Long-serving employees are entitled to equitable treatment in securing retirement benefits, and technical barriers should not hinder their rightful claims.
The withdrawal of a challenge to an appointment by the appointing authority and the subsequent approval of the appointment by the relevant authority validate the appointment and entitle the employee ....
The court affirmed that appointments made by municipalities under Section 53(4) of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 do not require prior approval, thus entitling the appointed individual to pensio....
The right to receive pension is a property under Article 31(1) of the Constitution, and pension and gratuity are earned benefits, not mere bounties. The Court emphasized the importance of socio-econo....
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.