13.01.2026 Sl. No.18(DL)

Ct. No.14 srm IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P.A. No. 4748 of 2025 Anuva Ghswami Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Tarapada Das, Mr. Mahadeb Khan …for the Petitioner.

Mr. Mostafijur Rahaman … for the State.

Mr. Subir Sanyal, Sr. Advocate ..amicus curiae.

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks for quashing, cancellation and/or setting aside of the order dated 17^th January, 2025 passed by the District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), South 24- Parganas, respondent No.4 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for exercising option for switching over from Contributory Provident Fund cum Gratuity Scheme to General Provident Fund and disentitling the petitioner to family pension.

2. The petitioner contends that her father Biresh Chandra Goswami was the Head Teacher of Madhusudan Chak Free Primary School, School No.690, Mathurapur South Circle at Madhusudan Chalk, P.O. Madhusudan Chalk, District-South 24-Parganas. The petitioner’s father served as an approved Head Teacher with effect from 2nd September, 1945. The service of the petitioner’s father was extended with effect from 19^th November, 1988 to 18^th November, 1989 in the 1^st term. The father of the petitioner died on 31st May, 1991 while in extended service during 2nd term. On the application of the mother of the petitioner, the Pension Payment Order was issued on 12^th September, 2002 only with gratuity amount of Rs.10,775/-. However, no family pension was granted. The mother of the petitioner, namely Durgesh Nandini Goswami died on 3rd December, 2005 leaving behind her two unmarried daughters, namely Anuva Goswami (the petitioner herein) and another elder daughter, namely Prativa Goswami and two sons, namely Ramananda Goswami and Anup Kumar Goswami. The petitioner is an unmarried daughter, who is fully dependent on her parents. On 17^th December, 2024, the petitioner made an application before the District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), South 24-Parganas, respondent No.4 with a prayer for sanction of family pension in view of Government Circular dated 13th April, 2010. The said prayer of the petitioner was rejected by the District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), South 24-Parganas vide letter dated 17^th January, 2025. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with such action of the respondent authorities, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Tarapada Das, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner was not in a position to exercise option for switching over from Contributory Provide Fund to General Provident Fund, since at that point of time the judgment of this Court was not passed in Pramila Behara versus The State of West Bengal (In Re: FMA 864 of 2022). He seeks for setting aside of the impugned order dated 17^th January, 2025 passed by the District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), South 24-Parganas, respondent No.4.

4. Mr. Subir Sanyal, learned Senior Advocate appearing as amicus curiae on the request of this Court, submits that since from the pleadings it is found that the service of the petitioner’s father was extended from time to time, it can be presumed that he did not exercise option for switching over from CPF to GPF. Without the option of switching over being exercised, the unmarried daughter cannot exercise such option to avail the benefit of family pension.

5. Mr. Mostafijur Rahaman, learned Advocate for the State submits that the employee did not exercise option to switch over from CPF to GPF. Therefore, there is no scope to exercise such option by his successor-in-

interest.

6. In RVW 68 of 2016 (The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Versus Smt. Jharna Bhattacharya & Ors.), it is held that an employee, who has opted for revised pay scale under ROPA, 1990, becomes entitled to pension and gratuity by operation of para 17 of ROPA 1990. It was not necessary for him to exercise fresh option as per M