JUDGMENT : 1. The present writ petition has been preferred challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents to disburse the pensionary benefits of the petitioner, who has retired from the post of headmistress of Shyamsundar Balika Vidyalaya (High) (in short, the said school) on 28th February, 2011. 2. Ms. Sanyal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially a Contributory Provident Fund (in short, CPF) optee. In terms of the government notification dated 13th June, 2014 pertaining to West Bengal Recognised Non-Government Educational Institution Employees (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit), 1981, the petitioner exercised option for pension including family pension-gratuity. Such option was accepted and the petitioner was asked to refund an amount of Rs. 5,51,320/- towards the government share of CPF along with interest. The said amount was duly refunded by the petitioner on 21st October, 2014. Subsequent thereto, liability/no liability certificate was also issued by the headmistress of the said school on 12th November, 2014. Thereafter the pension payment order was issued in favour of the petitioner entitling her to avail the pensionary benefits with effect from the date of refund of CPF contribution with interest as would be explicit from the pension payment order issued by the competent authority on 24th August, 2015. In spite of issuance of such pension payment order, the pensionary benefits have not been released. 3. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned appearing for the State respondents has not been able to answer the query of this Court as to why the pensionary benefits have not been released in favour of the petitioner though the no liability certificate and the pension payment order have already been issued, as would be evident from the documents appearing at pages 28 and 29 of the writ petition. 4. Mr. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.7 submits that the said respondent no.7 joined the post of headmistress of the said school after the retirement of the petitioner and, as such, it was not within her knowledge as to whether documents as required to be handed over by the petitioner on the date of retirement were handed over to the concerned teacher-in-charge. Drawing attention of this Court to a document at page 37 of the writ petition he submits that the utilisation certificates pertaining to grants during the tenure of the petitioner had not been returned by the petitioner. 5. Drawing attention of this Court to a document at page 37 of the writ petition he submits that the utilisation certificates pertaining to grants during the tenure of the petitioner had not been returned by the petitioner. 5. Indisputably, the petitioner retired from the post of headmistress on 28th February, 2011. She was a CPF optee and in terms of the government notification dated 13th June, 2014, she exercised option to avail pension including family pension-gratuity. Such option was accepted and she refunded the government’s share of an amount of Rs. 5,51,320/- on 21st October, 2014. It appears from the pension payment order that the petitioner would be entitled to pension with effect from the date of such refund (21st October, 2014). There was no disciplinary proceeding pending against the petitioner on the date of her retirement. No criminal proceeding has also been initiated against the petitioner. Once the petitioner retired, the master and servant relationship ceased and the relationship existed only for the purpose of payment of terminal benefits to the petitioner on the basis of the situation existing on the date of his retirement. Furthermore, it appears from the records that no liability certificate has already been issued by the respondent no.7. In the backdrop of such facts no reason is forthcoming as to why the pensionary benefits of the petitioner had been withheld. 6. 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.4, for taking appropriate steps towards disbursement of the pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner in the light of the observations made in the present order and subject to compliance of necessary formalities by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Court directs the respondent no.4 to take appropriate steps towards disbursement of the petitioner’s pensionary benefits upon conducting a hearing with prior notice to the petitioner and the respondent no.7. 8. The said respondent no.4 would be at liberty to call for all necessary records from the school authorities. 9. The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent no.4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. 10. 8. The said respondent no.4 would be at liberty to call for all necessary records from the school authorities. 9. The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent no.4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. 10. In the event the final pensionary benefits cannot be disbursed in favour of the petitioner, a reasoned order to that effect should be communicated to the petitioner by the respondent no.4 within the period as specified above. 11. It is made clear that the petitioner and the school authorities shall extend all necessary assistance to the respondent no.4 so that effective steps can be taken by the said respondent no.4 to comply with the directives contained in the present order. 12. With the above observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of. 13. There shall however be no order as to costs. 14. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.