MANSURA BEGAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
LAWS(CAL)-2018-6-100
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 12,2018

Mansura Begam Appellant
VERSUS
State of West Bengal and Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE,J. - (1.) Pursuant to my earlier order Mr. Dhole assisted by Mr. Abhisek Prosad is appearing on behalf of the State of West Bengal. Mr. Dhole has produced today a copy of the Calcutta Gazette Extraordinary. In it the notification has been published bearing no. 749-SE (L)/SL/5S-56/13(Pt-V) dated June 13, 2014. The judgment of the Hon'ble Special bench has also been quoted in the said notification. In the case of District Inspector of Schools (SE), Kolkata v. Abhijit Baidya and others reported in (2013)3 CLJ 178 , their Lordships in the Special Bench were inter alia pleased to directed as follows: "(76) We direct the State Government to give opportunity to all the petitioners and other employees similarly situated to submit option to switch-over to Pension-cum-Gratuity by issuing public notice in at least four newspapers having wide circulation in this State. Three months' time period be given to them to exercise option and let the amount be specified to each and every employee who elects to switch over to Pension-cum-Gratuity to deposit the amount of employer's share of contribution with interest and additional interest which is required to be refunded to the Government within the period specified. (77) If an employee exercises option, he shall be entitled to Pensioncum-Gratuity in accordance with law with effect from the date refund is made."
(2.) Pursuant thereto the State of West Bengal issued the above Government Order (G.O.) where at paragraph 3(ii) the following has been mentioned:- "The said employees shall exercise their options in the prescribed form and submit the same to the Headmaster/Headmistress/Teacher-in-Charge/in case of Secondary Schools (herein after referred to as the said Head of the Institution), to the Sub-Inspector of Schools in case of Primary Schools, as the case may be, within 3 months from the first date of publication of the said public notice in newspapers. In case of schools already abolished or derecognized, the option shall be submitted to District Inspector of Schools/Additional District Inspector of Schools/Assistant Inspector of Schools in charge of the Sub-Division, as the case may be. However, in case of amalgamated schools, the said employees shall submit option to the said Head of the Institution of the school with which the erstwhile school has been amalgamated or to the said Head of the Institution to which he was shifted. The said Head of the Institution shall submit his option to the Secretary or Administrator or DDO of the school (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary). The received copy of the said option is to be submitted to the District Inspector of Schools/Additional District Inspector of Schools/Assistant Inspector of Schools in charge of the sub-Division within 15 days from the date of exercise of such option."
(3.) It is the case of the writ petitioner that her husband who was superannuated from service on September 30, 2013 exercised the said option by signing the treasury challan form on October 30, 2014. Thereafter, her husband died, yet she complied with the order of the Hon'ble Special Bench and the circular by depositing the amount by way of refund equivalent to the employer's share of contribution with interest and additional interest to avail of the benefit of conversion from Contributory Provident Fund to Pension-cum-Gratuity. The petitioner claims that by the order at page 33 the Assistant Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, rejected her prayer for being given the benefit of Pension-cum-Gratuity only because according to the said respondent no.5, the option form was furnished beyond the prescribed period, id-est, on September 17, 2014 (not October 30, 2014 as stated by the writ petitioner) which was beyond three months from the date of the Government Order dated June 13, 2014. Thus, according to the respondent no.5, the petitioner's claim was barred by four days of delay in her husband's submitting the option.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.