Pratap Kumar Ray, J. - (1.) Heard learned advocates for the parties.
(2.) In this writ application, the Petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs: a) A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to allow the Petitioners to give option to the scheme of pension including Family Pension -cum -Gratuity as above; b) A Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to consider the application (Annexure 'A') to this petition filed by the Petitioners and allow the Petitioners to give option for scheme of pension including Family Pension -cum -Gratuity.
(3.) It is the case of the Petitioners, who are teaching and non/teaching staff of Thanarpara H.M. High Madrasa (hereinafter referred to as the concerned Madrasa) that in terms of Memo No. 496 -Edn.(b) dated December 16, 1991 they would be allowed to opt for pension, including Family Pension -cum -Gratuity Scheme by away of filing revised option to change the earlier option as filed for such benefit, namely, contributory provident fund cum gratuity scheme. It is the contention of the Petitioners that memo No. 496 -Edn.(B) dated December 16, 1991 was not circulated to the said Madrasa and accordingly they had no knowledge about the time limit of 90 days as prescribed in the said circular dated December 16, 1991 to file the revised option under the Scheme, as stated.;