State's requirement for Headmasters to refund benefits after arbitrary classification deemed illegal and all recognized benefits must be restored.

2025 APPELLATE SIDE WEDNESDAY WPA 30529 OF 2024 Court : CB-07 Item : DL-07 Bench : SINGLE GOUTAM KUMAR CHATTERJEE Matter : WPA Status : DO VS.

ID : 266057 AR : NANDY THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL& ORS.

MR. MD. MANUWAR ALI, ADVOCATE ……for the Petitioner MR. MD. NURE ZAMAN, ADVOCATE MS. ANIMA CHAKRABORTY, ADVOCATE …...for the State

1. The instant writ petition is yet another instance of the inconsistent stand taken by the State regarding the grant of additional benefits to the Headmasters of upgraded schools.

2. Initially, the Education Department decided to extend such benefits to the Headmasters of all upgraded schools, but subsequently revised its position and restricted the benefit to Headmasters of schools upgraded after a particular cut-off date. This change in stance led to disputes concerning the grant of retirement benefits to those Headmasters. The present lis is merely an offshoot of that dispute, which has entered the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court by preferring this writ petitionfiled by a retired Headmaster, primarily seeking a direction upon the concerned authority to refund an amount of Rs.1,12,716/- along with accrued interest, re-fix his pension, and release other consequential benefits.

3. The petitioner commenced his service career as an Assistant Teacher at Joyrampur Panchanan Chakraborty Vidyapith High School on 01.06.1985. Thereafter, on 19.02.1996 he assumed the charge of Headmaster at Balia P.N. Sinha High School, Murshidabad, which falls under the territorial jurisdiction of the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Murshidabad. From the said School he retiredon 31.01.2021 upon attaining the age of superannuation.

4. Taking into account the rise in prices and other relevant factors, the Government periodically introduced Rules for Revision of Pay. In 2009, the Revision of Pay and Allowances ( in short, ROPA) Rules, 2009 were framed, incorporating a provision to implement the State’s policy decision to grant an additional 3% increment to Headmasters and Headmistresses in recognition of the added administrative responsibilities they shoulder in managing schools.

5. In accordance with the ROPA 2009, the petitioner’s basic pay was fixed at Rs.25,910/- as on 01.01.2006, and this fixation was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools, the competent authority. The petitioner continued to avail this benefit, and after successive revisions in pay, his basic pay was revised to Rs.1,04,400/- as on 01.01.2020.

6. At the end of his service career, when the petitioner’s pension papers were forwarded to the competent authority for processing and release of pension benefits, an objection was raised. It was alleged that the petitioner’s pay had been erroneously fixed, and that he had been unlawfully granted a basic pay of Rs.37,190/-. The authority based this conclusion on the claim that the petitioner was not entitled to the 3% additional increment, as the school where he served as Headmaster had already been upgraded to the Higher Secondary level prior to 14.10.2014. Despite having been allowed to retire while drawing the said benefit, the authority subsequently determined that the petitioner had overdrawn a total amount of Rs.1,12,716/-. He was then directed to deposit the said amount as a precondition for the release of his pension.

7. Faced with these compelling circumstances, the petitioner deposited the said amount, following which his pension was released, albeit at a reduced rate. Consequently, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition.

8. Mr. Ali, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that a