Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12965 (CAL)

SULEKHA MUKHERJEE v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/1579/2026 · 2026-04-28

Bivas Pattanayak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

28.04.2026 Sl. No.198 Ct. No.14 ss IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 1579 of 2026 Sulekha Mukherjee VS State of West Bengal & ors. Ms. Debjani Sahu …for the Petitioner. Mr. Bikash Chakraborty …for the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks permission to deposit the employer’s share in Contributory Provident Fund with interest and additional interest in terms of government scheme in order to avail the benefit of family pension. 3. The petitioner contends that her husband, late Sailen Kumar Mukherjee @ Sailen Mukherjee was an approved Assistant Teacher in Paschim Memari Free Primary School under Kalanabagram Circle, District- Purba Badhaman. The petitioner’s husband retired from service on superannuation on 31st January, 2011 and expired on 8th March, 2011. The petitioner’s husband exercised option under ROPA 1990 as well as ROPA 1998 for revised scale of pay. In order to avail the benefit of family pension the petitioner being the widow of the deceased employee intends to deposit the Government’s share of Contributory Provident Fund. 4. Ms. Debjani Sahu, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that since the husband of the petitioner exercised option under ROPA 1990 and ROPA 1998 a fresh option would not be required. However, the grant of family pension will be subject to refund of the Government’s share of Contributory Provident Fund together with interest and additional interest. To buttress his contention, she relies on a decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court passed in State of West Bengal versus Sefali Jana (In Re: FMA 620 of 2022) as well as a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Santilata Mahato versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. (In Re: WPA 16272 of 2025). 5. Mr. Bikash Chakraborty, learned Advocate appearing for the State leaves the matter to the discretion of Court. 6. In line with of the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench as well as Coordinate Bench of this Court, the respondent No.3, District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), Purba Bardhaman is directed to calculate the amount required to be refunded by the petitioner including interest and additional interest to get the benefit of pension. Upon deposit of the said amount, the said respondent being the pension sanctioning authority shall verify the 2 pension papers of the petitioner’s husband and sent the same to the respondent No.2, Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal for further steps to be taken in accordance with law for issuance of the Pension Payment Order in favour of the petitioner. 7. The respondent Nos.3 and 2 shall complete the respective exercise as expeditiously as possible and the pension shall be paid to the petitioner on and from the next date of retirement of the petitioner’s husband. 8. With the above direction, the writ petition being WPA 1579 of 2026 stands disposed of. 9. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 11. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 12. There shall be no order as to costs. 13. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 14. Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.) 3