TILAK CH BARMAN v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS
WPA/920/2026 · 2026-06-17
Bivas Pattanayak
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23940 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23940 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
17.06.2026 Sl. No.33 Ct. No.6 ss IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE
W.P.A. No. 920 of 2026
Tilak Ch. Barman Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Taniya Bhowmik
…for the Petitioner. Mrs. Supriya Singh
Ms. Radhika Agarwal …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 direction upon the respondent authorities for disbursement of interest on delayed payment of gratuity and arrear pension amount from the date following the date of his retirement till the date of actual payment at the rate of 18% per annum. 3. The petitioner contends that he was an Assistant Teacher in Rangapani Balasi 5th Plan Primary School, District Coochbehar. The petitioner retired from service on superannuation on 30th November, 2008. The pension payment order was issued in favour of the petitioner on 10th September, 2010. The gratuity and arrear pension amount was
2 disbursed in favour of the petitioner on 20th September, 2010. However, no interest on the aforesaid amount has been paid in favour of the petitioner. Hence this writ petition. 4. Ms. Taniya Bhowmik, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that there is a delay in disbursement of the gratuity and arrear pension amount and as such the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on the delayed payment of gratuity and arrear pension amount. She seeks for appropriate orders. 5. Mrs. Supriya Singh, learned Advocate for the State leaves the matter to the discretion of the Court. 6. Though there is delay in making such claim, however, delay per se cannot defeat the valuable right of the petitioner. Relief may be granted to the writ petitioner in spite of the delay if it does not affect the right of third parties. (See: Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh reported in (2008) 3 SCC 648). 7. From the aforesaid contentions made in the writ petition, it is found that there is considerable delay in disbursement of the gratuity and arrear pension amount. It is the bounden duty of the State to disburse all the pensionary benefits to the employee
3 forthwith, failing which the employee is entitled to interest on the aforesaid amount. 8. Accordingly, respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and respondent no.
3, the Treasury Officer, Mathabhanga, are directed to disburse the interest at the rate of @ 8% per annum on the gratuity and arrear pension amount in favour of the petitioner by way of pensionary benefits from the date following the date of his retirement till the date of actual payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order. 9. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and respondent no. 3, the Treasury Officer, Mathabhanga, for necessary compliance. 10. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition being WPA 920 of 2026 is disposed of. 11. Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied. 4
12. Consequently, connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 13. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. 14. There shall be no order as to costs. 15. 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.)