LAWS(CAL)-2022-1-84

CHHANDA DUTTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Decided On January 14, 2022
Chhanda Dutta Appellant
V/S
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner retired as the Assistant Headmistress of Balurghat Girls High School upon attaining the age of superannuation on 30/6/2017. The petitioner has challenged a decision of the District Inspector (DI) dtd. 14/5/2018 by which the petitioner was directed to refund the House Rent Allowance (HRA) on the basis of salary drawn in excess. The petitioner also claims a direction on the respondents to release her pensionary benefits along with accrued interest.

(2.) According to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner had to take accommodation in the building adjacent to the school which was maintained by the school authority and was in the nature of a private arrangement. Counsel submits that the petitioner paid rent to the school for the accommodation. Counsel relies on a resolution of the Managing Committee dtd. 26/2/2009 which decided that the teachers who opted to stay at the Teachers Hostel would have to pay for the maintenance and renovation including electricity charges. Counsel places a letter of the President of the School dtd. 24/9/2016 which informed that HRA would be deducted from all those residing in the school hostel. Counsel relies on 2 unreported decisions of this Court to submit that the impugned decision of the DI cannot be legally permitted since such decision was taken long after the petitioner retired from the School.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayers in the Writ Petition on the ground that the petitioner used to live in the accommodation constructed and maintained by the Government and denies that the said building was maintained by the school authority. Counsel submits that the issue involves disputed questions of fact which cannot be entertained in a writ jurisdiction. Counsel relies on Director, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kesaragod and Ors. Vs. M. Purushothaman and Ors.; 1994 Supp (3) SCC 282; for the proposition that HRA is a compensatory allowance and cannot be used as a source of profit.