27-04-2026 Item No.24 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No.23792 of 2025 Sadhna Pramanik -vs- The Punjab National Bank & Ors. Mr. Debasish Kundu Mr. Bidan Modak Mr. Sudeepto Kumar Basu …for the petitioner Mr. R.N. Majumder Mr. S.M. Obaidullah Mr. R. Chowdhury …for the bank 1. The petitioner is a divorced mentally imbalanced daughter of a deceased employee of Punjab National Bank. She claims family pension. 2. A representation dated December 4, 2024 was made by her learned counsel seeking family pension. The same was replied to by the bank on December 30, 2024. 3. It is alleged that the reply of the bank does not mention as to whether the prayer of the petitioner has been allowed or rejected. The communication of the bank only refers to Regulation 40 of the Punjab National Bank Employees’ (Pension) Regulations, 1995. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bank ought to have specified as to whether the prayer of the petitioner is allowed or not, and that without proper consideration and disposal of the prayer of the petitioner, the petitioner is not in a position to proceed with her case further. 5. Prayer has been made to direct the bank to consider her prayer for grant of family pension. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Regulation 40 of the 1995 Regulations wherein the provision for grant of family pension to the son or daughter of an employee suffering from mental disability has been prescribed. 7. On perusal of the records it appears that the reply by the bank to the prayer of the petitioner has only highlighted Regulation 40(b) and (iv). 8. It further appears that Regulation 40 contains several provisions dealing with the guidelines relating to grant of family pension to divorced mentally disabled daughter of a deceased employee of the bank. The bank has not considered the prayer of the petitioner in terms of Regulation 40. Part provision of Regulation 40 has been merely quoted in the letter of the bank dated December 30, 2024. 9. As it appears that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of family pension is pending consideration at the end of the bank, accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by directing the General Manager of Punjab National Bank to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s prayer for grant of family pension strictly in accordance with the prevailing Regulations at the earliest but positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. 10. It will be open for the authority to seek for documents in support of the mental health of the petitioner. 11. A reasoned order either accepting or rejecting the prayer of the petitioner shall be passed and communicated to her. 2 12. If the prayer of the petitioner is accepted by the authority, then necessary consequential steps shall be taken without any further delay. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall forward a copy of the representation along with all necessary documents to the aforesaid respondent at the time of communicating this order. 14. Affidavit of service is taken on record. It appears that copy of the writ petitions addressed to the Circle Manager and the Zonal Manager of the Punjab National Bank has been returned with the postal remark ‘no such addressee in the address’ and ‘left without instructions’ respectively. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take back such unserved copies of the writ petition. The unserved envelopes shall be retained with the records. 16. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 17. Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties. [Amrita Sinha, J] 3 4