Sri Hemanta Bairagya vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 January, 2018


Item No.03
W.P 30947(W) of 2017

Sri Hemanta Bairagya
The State of West Bengal Ors.

Mr. Prasenjit Debnath … For the petitioner

Mr. Saugata Bhattacharyya,
Mr. Bhaskar Chakraborty ….. For the State

Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner be kept on record.

Mr. Debnath, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner’s mother was appointed and approved as a Group-D staff in

Srikhanda Ushangini Girls’ School (in short the said school) in the year 1982.

On the basis of a complaint, an F.I.R was registered against the petitioner’s

mother and others on 26th July, 2008 and a criminal case being Katwa Police

Station case no. 209 of 2008 dated 26th July, 2008 under Sections

498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioner

and others. The petitioner’s mother was arrested but subsequently she obtained

bail and applied to the school authorities to resume her duties.

Upon consideration of such prayer of the petitioner’s mother, the school

authorities allowed the petitioner’s mother to resume her duties on and from 2nd

of January, 2009 and she ultimately retired from her service on 31st March, 2013

but thereafter no steps have been taken by the respondents to disburse the

pensionary benefits of the petitioner’s mother to which the petitioner and his

brother and two sisters are entitled to. As such, the petitioner submitted a

representation to the respondent no.5, being the pension sanctioning authority,

to take steps for disbursement of the admissible benefits but the same was not

responded to. As such, the petitioner approached this Court. Drawing the

attention of this Court to a judgment dated 29th April, 2017 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katwa, Mr. Debnath submits that all the

accused persons were found not guilty of the charges and they were acquitted.

Prior to delivery of such judgment the petitioner’s mother expired on 4th of

January, 2016. In such circumstances, there can be no reason to withhold the

disbursement of the pensionary benefits of the petitioner’s mother.

Drawing the attention of this Court to a document annexed at page 29 of

the writ petition, Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the State

respondents submits that certain observations were made by the auditing

authority and it needs to be ascertained as to whether the information and the

records sought for had been furnished by the school authorities.

Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties

and upon considering the materials on record, I am of the opinion that no useful

purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the same needs

to be relegated to the pension sanctioning authority, being the respondent no.5,

for taking appropriate steps towards disbursement of the pensionary benefits of

the deceased Group-D staff to her legal heirs since the criminal case has already

been disposed of by a judgment dated 29th April, 2017.

Accordingly, this Court directs the respondent no.5 to consider the

petitioner’s representation dated 9th November, 2017 and to take appropriate

steps towards disbursement of the admissible pensionary benefits of the

deceased Group-D staff in favour of her legal heirs and to issue necessary

direction to that effect by a reasoned order, upon granting an opportunity of

hearing to all the legal heirs of the deceased Group-D staff and the school


The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent no.5 within a

period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order along with a

copy of the writ petition.

The respondent no.5 would be at liberty to call for all necessary records

from the school authorities including the documents referred to in the memo

dated 21st September, 2012 issued by the Joint Director of Accounts (Edn),

Burdwan annexed at page 29 of the writ petition.

It is made clear that the school authorities and the petitioner shall extend

all assistance to the respondent no.5 to enable him to take appropriate steps to

comply with the directives contained in the present order.

With the above observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties on

compliance of all formalities.

(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *