IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

RESERVED ON: 17.09.2025 DELIVERED ON: 25.09.2025

PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH

WPA 6883 OF 2024

SOUMENDRA NATH CHATTERJEE

VERSUS

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

Appearance:-

Mr. Akashdeep Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. Soummyadeep Nag, Adv.

Ms. Soumali Das, Adv.

.…………………….. for the Petitioner.

Mrs. Chandrani Bhattacharya, Adv.

….…….… for the Municipality.

Mr. Shamim Ul Bari, Adv.

……….......…………for the State.

JUDGMENT

Gaurang Kanth, J. :-

1. The Petitioner in the present writ petition is seeking a direction against the

Respondent Municipality in granting post-facto approval to the appointment to the Petitioner in the post of Mazdoor and promotion to the post of Collecting Sarkar in the Respondent Municipality. The Petitioner is also seeking a direction upon the respondent to grant and release the full pension and gratuity benefits to him as per his entitlement and in

accordance with law.

2. The facts of the case as is emerged from the present writ petition is as

follows:

3. The Petitioner was initially appointed as a Mazdoor on 01.04.1983 by the Respondent Municipality. Subsequently, vide order dated 01.03.1985, the Vice Chairman of the Respondent Municipality promoted the Petitioner to the post of Office Caretaker. Thereafter, pursuant to the resolution of the Board of Councillors of the Respondent Municipality dated 27.02.1995, the Chairman of the Respondent Municipality, vide letter dated 29.03.1995, further promoted the Petitioner to the post of Collecting Sarkar.

4. During his tenure of service, the Petitioner was paid salary and extended all service-related benefits applicable to Government employees. The benefits under ROPA 1990, ROPA 1998, ROPA 2009, as well as the Career Advancement Scheme, were duly extended to him.

5. The service book of the Petitioner was duly prepared and authenticated by the Chairman and the Executive Officer of the Respondent Municipality, and the same reflects the entire service record of the Petitioner.

6. The Executive Officer of the Respondent Municipality, vide letter dated

24.03.2015, directed the Petitioner to submit requisite documents before the Establishment Department for the purpose of processing his pensionary benefits in accordance with law.

7. Upon rendering unblemished service for approximately 33 years, the Petitioner superannuated from the services of the Respondent Municipality on 31.03.2016.

8. However, as the Respondent Municipality failed to release the retiral dues of the Petitioner, he was constrained to file WPA No. 19534 of 2018. This Court, vide order dated 05.03.2021, disposed of the said writ petition with liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Respondents therein within two weeks, and further directed the said Respondents to consider and decide the representation within four weeks thereafter.

9. Pursuant to the said order, the Petitioner submitted a fresh representation, whereupon the Director, Local Bodies, conducted a hearing on 26.03.2021. However, no final order was passed. Thereafter, the Petitioner once again submitted a representation dated 22.12.2023, which too has not elicited any response from the authorities.

10. The Respondent Municipality, vide letter dated 07.09.2023, even requested the Director, Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance (DPPG) to release pension and gratuity in favour of the Petitioner in terms of Order No. 110/UDMA-25011(11)/109/2022-LSG SEC dated 06.02.2023.

11. Despite the above, the Respondents have released only part of the retiral benefits and are paying the Petitioner provisional pension on a monthly basis.

12. Aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondents in not releasing his full retiral benefits and regular pension, the Petitioner has been constrained to prefer the present writ petition, inter alia, seeking post facto approval of his appointment as well as the release of his legitimate retiral dues.

Submission on behalf of the Petitioner

13.