Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 35756 (CAL)

BISWANATH KARMAKAR v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS

WPA/21500/2026 · 2026-08-25

Reetobroto Kumar Mitra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

25/08 2026 AD/15/18 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/21500/2026 BISWANATH KARMAKAR VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Mr. Sandipan Banerjee, Advocate Ms. Purbasha Nandy Brahma, Advocate ……for the Petitioner Mr. Anindya Bhattacharyya, Advocate Mr. Amit Dey, Advocate ……for the State 1. The petitioner retired on April 30, 2017 as a ‘Darwan’ in the State Dairy Department of the Government of West Bengal. He continued to hold on to the residential accommodation provided to him for a period of six months with permission. He handed over the possession of the said premise on November 8, 2017, which was accepted by the respondents without any protest and/or demur. 2. The petitioner has been paid all his retiral benefits except for the leave salary, which is about Rs.2,70,000/-. The petitioner has made repeated requests to the authorities, which were ignored and no steps were taken to release such leave salary in favor of the petitioner. 3. Mr. Dey, learned Advocate appears for the State and submits that in spite of his repeated requests, the authorities have not furnished any information or instruction to him, on account whereof he is helpless. 4. Non-furnishing the information or instruction to the learned Advocate is a clear reflection of the fact that the authorities have no defense to the claim of the petitioner. P a g e | 2 5. As submitted by Mr. Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, there is no pending proceeding against his client. 6. In view of the afore-stated, I direct respondent no. 2 to take all necessary steps to immediately release the said sum of Rs.2,70,000/- in favor of the petitioner upon completion of all formalities by September 30, 2026. 7. The petitioner was entitled to such payment in November 2017, on account whereof the petitioner will be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from November 2017 till the actual date of payment. 8. In default of payment by the afore-stated timelines, the petitioner will be entitled to further interest of 2% from October 1, 2026. 9. With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.) P a g e | 3