Form No. J (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Biswajit Basu.

W.P.A. 29166 of 2022 Smt. Kananbala Thokdar & ors.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the petitioners: Mr. Kamalesh Bhyattacharyya, Mr. Samim Ul Bari, Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya.

For the State: Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra, Sr. Govt. Adv, Mr. Amartya Pal.

For the respondent no.5: Mr. P.S. Deb Barman, Mr. Debangana Dey Nayak.

Heard on: 25.04.2025 Judgment on: 30.04.2025 Biswajit Basu, J.

1. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners was the Teacher-in-charge of Gangadevi High School, District: Malda(hereinafter referred to as ‘the said teacher’ in short). The said teacher was suspended on the allegation that he has misappropriated a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lakh only) granted to the school for construction of additional class rooms under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. The said teacher was suspended by the Managing Committee of the said School and the order of suspension was affirmed by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education in an appeal preferred by the said teacher, on the said allegation of defalcation of school fund, a criminal case being Chanchal Police Station Case No. 85 of 2008 dated May 07, 2008 under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code was initiated against him.

2. The said teacher, while in suspension, had attained the age of superannuation and had retired from his service on June 30, 2009. He filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 1668(W) of 2010 alleging delay in disbursement of his retiral benefits. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated January 10, 2012 directing the concerned authorities to complete the service book as well as the pension papers of the said teacher within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the said order and to complete the exercise regarding payment of the retiral dues.

3. In compliance with the said direction, the pension payment order was issued on July 04, 2018 but the retiral benefits could not be disbursed as the school refuses to grant the ‘No-Liability’ certificate to the said teacher, in the meantime, the said teacher had died. The petitioners, being the heirs and legal representatives of the said deceased teacher are now praying release of the arrear pension and other retiral benefits and grant of family pension in favour of the widow of the deceased teacher, the petitioner no. 1 herein.

4. Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharyay, learned senior advocate for the petitioners submits that the criminal case has been abated on the death of the said teacher, though he was placed under suspension, no disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. He then refers to paragraph 19(5) under Chapter V of the DCRB Scheme, 1981 and submits that the said scheme contemplates a particular situation in which the full pension of a teacher can be denied but such situation does not exist in the present case, therefore, the disbursement of retiral benefits of the deceased teacher cannot be denied.

5. Mr. Partha Sarathi Deb Barman, learned advocate for the school submits that his client is not objecting grant of the retiral benefits of the deceased teacher but the school is not in a position to issue the No-Liability certificate as the school records would show that the said deceased teacher, from time to time, had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lakh only) from the school fund, which was sanctioned to the school for construction of its additional school rooms under Paschimbanga Sarva Shiksha Mission. There is no evidence/document with the school either regarding utilization of the said money or refund of it, in fact the additional class rooms could not be constructed for want of the said money. The said teacher was asked to explain the situation but he did not respond. He further submits that the auditor of the said school in his audit report for the financial year 2007-08 has pointed out that the deceased teacher had withdrawn the said money but th