PADMA NATH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue in these writ petitions is whether the widow of a retired teacher who has enjoyed his pension benefits after retirement, is entitled to interest on delayed payment of the pension benefits. Since the facts of the writ petitions are substantially similar, the factual position in W.P. 6649(W) of 2019 is being referred to as a prototype of the case made out in all the other writ petitions.

(2.) The petitioner's husband was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the concerned school on 1st June, 1974 and retired from service on 31st March, 2007. The petitioner's husband completed all formalities in relation to disbursement of his pension and submitted the same to the appropriate authority prior to his retirement. The Pension Payment Order (PPO) was issued by the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance and the amount of pension and arrear pension was sanctioned on 22nd March, 2007 and on 13th March, 2013. Pursuant to issue of the P.P.O by the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance (under ROPA 2009) on 13th March, 2013, the petitioner appeared before the Treasury Officer to discharge his statutory obligation in terms of the Death-cum-Retirement Benefit Scheme, 1981. It is the case of the writ petitioner that after meeting the concerned authorities several times, the arrear pension was finalised in favour of the petitioner's husband on 30th September, 2007 and 3rd July, 2013. The petitioner has stated that the concerned authorities were also requested to pay interest on the arrear pension calculated from the day following the date of retirement of the petitioner's husband until the date of actual disbursement of the arrear pension. The petitioner's husband died on 17th January, 2019 after which the petitioner requested the concerned authorities to sanction and disburse interest on delayed payment of pension benefits in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for interest on the delayed payment of arrear pension by reason of the delay on the part of the concerned authorities in disbursing the pension benefits to the petitioner's husband after his retirement. Counsel relies on S.K. Dua Vs. State of Haryana, 2008 3 SCC 44; Niranjan Kumar Mondal Vs. The State of West Bengal, 2012 1 WbLR.903 (Cal) on the point of entitlement of a petitioner to interest on delay in disbursement of retirement benefits. Counsel also relies on J. Kasthuri Vs. The Commissioner, Chennai Municipal Corporation in W.P. No. 19611 of 2013 in The High Court of Judicature at Madras and a decision of a learned Single Judge of this court in W.P. No. 9250(W) of 2018 (Dipali Sikder Vs. The State of West Bengal) for the proposition that family pension is not merely a statutory right of the wife or the dependant or the family member of the deceased employee but is a constitutional promise, denial of which amounts to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The co-ordinate Bench of this court in Dipali Sikder Vs. The State of West Bengal held in favour of entitlement of interest on the delayed payment and gratuity to the petitioner's husband.