July 9, 2026 (28) ARDR WPA 9588 of 2026 Sthaleswar Bera Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. Adv. Rama Halder, …for the petitioner. Adv. D. N. Ray, Ld. G.P., Adv. Madhu Jana, Adv. Puja Sonkar, …for the State. Report submitted by the State is taken on record. The petitioner was appointed as Tax Collector in Chandrarekha Gram Panchayat and joined the said post on 31st December, 1998. A notification was issued by the Government of West Bengal, Department of Panchayats and Rural Development, Panchayat Wing on 24th January, 2011 for recruitment to the post of Panchayat Karmee and other posts wherein one of the criteria for such recruitment was that the candidates would be of age not more than forty-five years and not less than eighteen years on the first day of January of the year of recruitment. There was a provision for relaxation of the said age limit for the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Exempted Category, Physically Handicapped persons and Ex-servicemen in terms of rules and orders issued by the State Government from time to time. The petitioner applied for the said post and was appointed as Gram Panchayat Karmee upon compliance of relevant rules on 3rd May, 2013. By way of such appointment, his age was deemed to have been relaxed. After his superannuation, the documents with regard to his pension 2 were sent to the Financial Control and Chief Accounts Officer, Jhargram Zilla Parishad for necessary approval. The matter was thereafter referred to the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance through e- pension portal for final approval. The said authority returned the file on 12th November, 2025 with an observation “age limit at entry into service for OBC candidates is 43 years but the employee as OBC candidate joined service beyond the aforesaid age limit.” The petitioner seeks release of his entire retiral benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was appointed to the post of Panchayat Karmee upon consideration of his age at the time of appointment and deemed relaxation of the same, his retiral benefits cannot be withheld by the authority on the ground that over age was not condoned. It appears from the report submitted by the State that the petitioner was forty-six years and four months on 1st January, 2012, i.e., the year of recruitment. He therefore crossed the maximum age limit which could not have been condoned. The existing system does not allow recommendation of condonation of over age and the pension case of the petitioner can be processed if the existing system maintained by the Panchayats and Rural Development Department permits such condonation. It is not in dispute that the petitioner satisfied the other criteria laid down in the relevant notification when his appointment to the post of Panchayat Karmee was 3 considered. It is a fact that the upper age limit for the said post is forty-five years as on 1st January of the year of the recruitment. However, the notification includes a clause for relaxation of such upper age limit for certain categories of applicants including the Other Backward Class. The petitioner admittedly belongs to the Other Backward Class. He was appointed to the post upon consideration of his age and length of service in terms of the notification. Such consideration can be said to be deemed condonation of his over age at the time of his appointment. Since the authority chose to issue appointment letter in favour of the petitioner and allowed him to join the post of Panchayat Karmee in terms of the notification, it can be inferred that his over age as on 1st January, 2012 was considered and condoned by the authority at the time of his appointment. The petitioner has superannuated from the said post after rendering continuous unblemished service. There was no fault on the part of the petitioner and no suppression of his actual age for being considered for the said post and he should not be made to suffer for the subsequent decision taken by the authority adversely affecting him. The authority can, under no circumstance, take a U-turn after his superannuation and withhold his retiral benefits on the ground of his over age at the time of appointment. In view of the above, the Block Development Officer, Nayagram, being the 5th respondent herein, is directed to sanction the entire retiral benefits of the petitioner along with arrears and forward the same to the Director of 4 Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, being the 8th respondent herein, within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. Upon receipt of the same, the 8th respondent is directed to issue the pension payment order in favour of the petitioner and send the same to the Treasury Officer, Jhargram, being the 9th respondent herein, within four weeks therefrom. The 9th respondent shall thereafter release the said amount in favour of the petitioner within two weeks therefrom. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall however, be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)