Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 855 (CAL)

Sabita Rani Sinha v. State of West Bengal

2016-11-07

C.S.KARNAN

body2016
C. S. Karnan, J.: The brief facts of the case are as follows: 1. Ms. Dey(Dhabal), learned advocate appearing of behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s husband was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 01.06.1954 in Natibpur Bhoodeb Primary School (hereinafter referred to as the said School) from where he retired on 31.09.1991. The Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance of the Government of West Bengal issued Pension Payment Order dated 08.02.2000 wherein the Respondents surprisingly deducted an amount of Rs.1,17,227/- under the caption ‘overdrawn’. She further submitted that he had been paid regularly with all arrears under ROPA Rules and never made any misrepresentation nor he has ever withdrawn any excess amount. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached the 3rd Respondent in person on 12th February, 2014 and 10th March, 2016 and requested the respondent to release the deducted amount as overdrawn on 08.02.2000. The said Respondent did not give any reply. Hence the aforesaid Writ Petition has been filed. 2. No one appears on behalf of the respondents and no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed in spite of direction. Hence, this Court is constrained to dispose of the writ petition. 3. The Highly competent Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner’s husband had been working as an Assistant Teacher of the said School from 01.06.1954 and he had retired on 31.09.1992. The Respondent had issued a Pension Payment Order on 08.02.2000 after deducting a sum of Rs.1,17,227/- as overdrawn amount. The said deduction is an adversary one, without any notice to the Petitioner’s husband for an inquiry, the amount being reduced by the Respondents is illegal and unwarranted. Hence the very competent Counsel prays before this Court to allow the above Writ Petition. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and on perusing the annexed documents along with the Writ Petition the view of this Court is that the Respondent suo motu deducted a sum of Rs.1,17,227/- as overdrawn amount by its Pension Payment Order dated 08.02.2000. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and on perusing the annexed documents along with the Writ Petition the view of this Court is that the Respondent suo motu deducted a sum of Rs.1,17,227/- as overdrawn amount by its Pension Payment Order dated 08.02.2000. Therefore, this Court is constrained to allow the above Writ Petition with a decision to the Respondents to release the amount of a sum of Rs.1,17,227/- which was deducted on the heading overdrawn with accrued interest at the rate of 9(nine) per cent per annum within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order. The interest will be calculated from the date of retirement of the Petitioner. 5. If the Respondents are not satisfied with the said order then they are at liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate forum, subject to prior payment of 50 per cent of the deducted amount to the Petitioner by way of pay order. 6. Accordingly this writ petition disposed of. 7. Parties are at liberty to get Xerox certified copy of this order upon production of the receipts of payment of requisite Court Fees.