JUTHIKA TOKDAR Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of challenge in this writ application is an order issued by the respondent/authority, whereby the writ petitioner, an Assistant approved Teacher of Pakuahat Ananda Niketan Mahabir High School, Malda, was directed to refund an overdrawn salary of Rs.7,41,045/-, on the allegation she joined her service by fraudulently and dishonestly hiding her real age and thereby remained in service for more than 2 years, after she crossed the age of superannuation, without such service period being sanctioned by the Government Rules and withholding of her pensionary benefit.

(2.) Mr. Bari, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner submitted that the allegations against his client are incorrect and even assuming that she has overdrawn her salary by remain in service for 2 years after crossing the age of superannuation, still the authority concerned, without initiating departmental proceedings against her in accordance with law, has no legal right to either call upon her to refund the overdrawn salary or to withhold her pensionary benefits. He further submitted, in any event no departmental proceeding can now be initiated against her after she retired from her service. He lastly contended the pendency of a criminal case is no ground to withhold the penstionary benefit of any person. Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Managing Committee of the School submitted that the petitioner joined the School in the year 1981 declaring her date of birth to be on January 14, 1951 and according to her own declaration, her such date of birth was recorded in her Service Book under her own signature. Thereafter she worked in the school till March, 2010 and only when she submitted her superannuation papers to the District Inspector of School (S.E.), Malda, on March 17, 2010, it was detected from her age related educational documents that her actual date of birth was January 14, 1948. He then pointed out after detection of such fraud, on and from March 19, 2010 she remained absent in school. It is then contended by him that by such misrepresentation and practising fraud, the writ petitioner remained in service for two years more after she crossed the age of superannuation and thereby cheated the State and the public at large. He further submitted that no departmental proceeding could have been initiated during her tenure in service, since such fraud was detected after her retirement and from the superannuation papers submitted by her on March 17, 2010 to the respondent authorities. He further pointed out at once such fraud was detected, the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the School, on May 18,2010, lodged a First

(3.) the concerned police station against the delinquent and on the basis of such complaint, an FIR being Bamongola Police Station Case No.56 of 2010 was registered and after completion of investigation, Police has submitted charge-sheet under Section 420 IPC against the petitioner and the matter is now pending for trial being the G.R.Case No.1702 of 2010 before the learned Judicial Magistrate 2nd Court, Malda. He then vehemently contended in view of such circumstances, the School authority by annexure P/4 called upon the writ petitioner to refund the overdrawn salary, she obtained after she crossed the age of superannuation and her pensionary benefit has been withheld till the conclusion of her trial in the criminal case. He further submitted that the action taken by the respondent/authorities is fully justified.