21.08.2026 Item no.D/L 09 Court No. 24 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No. WPA 14444 of 2026 In the matter of: Durga Jana …. Petitioner VS. The State of West Bengal & Ors. ….Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Shakti Pada Jana Mr. Subhajyoti Das ….Advocates For the State: Mr. Rivu Dutta Mr. Jatinder Singh Daft ….Advocates 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner was appointed as an assistant teacher of a school on 14th August, 1992. Her pay was fixed accordingly by the authority. She was promoted as headmistress on 1st March, 2008 and her promotion was approved by the competent authority. Her scale of pay was re-fixed in accordance with her designation. In view of implementation of ROPA 2009, her pay was further re-fixed. She superannuated from service on 31st May, 2026. 3. She is yet to receive her terminal dues allegedly on account of an objection raised by DPPG mentioning that pay fixation of the headmistress of the high school has not been done on pay as assistant teacher. The matter is to be reviewed. Overdrawal, if any, needs to be refunded. The objection was forwarded to the head of the institution on 20th May, 2026. 4. Submission of the petitioner is that the pay of the petitioner was fixed by the authority strictly in accordance with the scale of pay Page 2 applicable in her case. There was no involvement of the petitioner in re-fixation of her pay. 5. It has been argued that as long as the petitioner was in service, the issue of overdrawal of payment was never made known to her. After she has superannuated, the authority does not have any power to seek refund of any overdrawn amount, if made. 6. Prayer has been made to direct the respondents to process her pension file and release all her terminal dues. 7. Learned advocate representing the State respondents relies upon the instruction forwarded by the Assistant Director, DPPG signed on 19th August, 2026. The same mentions about the system generated track report along with the audit objection. Till the objection is answered, the pension file of the petitioner cannot be processed. 8. The instruction forwarded by the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Purba Medinipur signed on 21st August, 2026 has also been placed. 9. It appears therefrom that the head of the institution has been made aware to comply with the objection raised by DPPG. There is no compliance at the end of the school authority till date. 10. Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and on perusal of the documents annexed to the writ petition, it appears that the entire pay statement of the petitioner is annexed to the writ petition. The pay of the petitioner in the post of the assistant teacher and, thereafter, in the post of headmistress on promotion are duly mentioned. 11. The pay appears to have been approved by the competent authority from time to time. The petitioner remained in service from 14th August, 1992 till 31st May, 2026. As long as the petitioner was in service, there was no objection raised from either of the parties Page 3 intimating her regarding any amount drawn in excess. After the teacher has retired from service, the authority ought not to raise the issue of excess payment. 12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors. reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 laid down the facts and circumstances where refund from the employees is impermissible. The authority cannot seek refund from an employee who has retired from service. 13. In view of the above, the Court is of the considered opinion that the authority ought to proceed with processing of the pension file of the petitioner to release her terminal dues. 14. Steps shall be taken to release the dues of the petitioner at the earliest but positively within four months from the date of communication of this order. 15. The authority would not be permitted to seek for refund of any amount paid to the petitioner. If it is found that the pay of the petitioner has not been fixed properly, the same may be fixed in accordance with law. 16. The writ petition stands disposed of. 17. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 18. Certified copy of the server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)