RAKESH TIWARI,ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) By consent of the learned advocate for the State the application is taken up for hearing without calling for affidavits and the appeal itself.
(2.) The appellant filed a writ petition, being WP 10488(W) of 2015, which was disposed of by order dated 21st July, 2015. The relevant portion in the said order is extracted below: "The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for non-payment of his Provident Fund dues by the authority. The petitioner retired from service on 30th October, 2013. Unfortunately till date, Provident Fund dues has not been disbursed in favour of the petitioner as the school authority did not forward all papers pertaining to the petitioner's provident fund dues. Mr. Samanta, learned advocate appearing for respondent nos. 5 and 6 submits that all papers have already been forwarded by the school authority to the respondent no.3, the Additional District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Uluberia Sub-Division on 30th April, 2015 which is not disputed by the leaned advocate appearing for the State. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perusing the record, I am of the view that the justice would be sub-served if the respondent no.3, the Additional District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) , Uluberia Sub-Division is directed to disburse the petitioner's provident fund dues within two weeks from the date of communication of this order."
(3.) The appellant then came with another writ petition upon having received a sum of Rs. 7,84,425/- by cheque dated 2nd September, 2015. In the second writ petition, being WP 28426(W) of 2015, the appellant prayed for interest on delayed payment. The second writ petition was disposed of by order dated 28th November, 2016. The said order says, inter alia, as follows: "This is the second writ petition at the behest of the petitioner. Earlier being W.P. no. 10488(W) of 2015 was disposed of by directing the authorities to disburse the provident fund to the petitioner. Such writ petition contained a prayer for interest. The same was not allowed. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to consider the prayer for interest any further in view of the order passed in the earlier writ petition. W.P. No. 28426(W) of 2015 is disposed of without any order as to costs." ;