08.09.2026 Sl. No.25 Ct. No.14 gd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA/6106/2026 Timir Baran Maity & Ors. VS The State of West Bengal and Ors. Mr. Sourav Mitra Ms. Sreyasree Choudhury Ms. Jonaki Saha …for the Petitioners. Mr. Sourav Sengupta Ms. Mary Datta Ms. Sruti Datta …for the State. 1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioners is taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition the petitioners seek direction upon the respondent authorities to disburse the interest amount towards the arrear family pension till the date of actual disbursement of amount together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 3. The petitioners contend that their father, late Ananta Kumar Maity was an Assistant Teacher of Pachghori Primary School, P.O.-Bayenda, District-Purba Medinipur who retired from service on 30th November, 1979 and expired on 6th December, 2007. The mother of the petitioners died on 5th October, 2015. The petitioners are the sons and daughter of the deceased teacher. The Pension Payment Order was issued on 31st January, 2012. The mother of the petitioners received pensionary benefits on 31st May, 2012. However, no interest has been paid. Hence this writ petition. 4. Mr. Sourav Mitra, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that they are entitled to receive interest on delayed payment of arrear family pension from the date of their entitlement i.e. from 15th June, 1990, since the father retired prior to 1981. 5. None appears on behalf of the State. 6. Mr. Sourav Sengupta, learned advocate, who usually appears on behalf of the State, is requested to appear in this matter along with junior of his choice. Let the appearance of Mr. Sengupta along with junior be regularised by the competent authority. 7. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to hand over a copy of the writ petition along with its annexures to the learned advocate for the State. 8. Mr. Sengupta, learned advocate for the State leaves the matter to the discretion of this Court. 9. 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 petitioners 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). 10. It is found from the contention in the writ petition that there is delay in disbursement of the arrear family pension amount to the mother of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are entitled to interest on the aforesaid amount. 2 11. In view of the above, respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and respondent no.3, Treasury Officer, Contai are directed to disburse the interest @ 8% per annum to the petitioners on the amount released in favour of the petitioners by way of arrear family pension on and from 15th June, 1990 till the date of actual payment, to the extent of their shares. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 12. Learned advocate for the petitioners is directed to communicate this order to respondent no. 2, the Director of Pension, Provident Fund & Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and also the respondent no.3, Treasury Officer, Contai for necessary compliance. 13. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition being WPA 6106 of 2026 is disposed of. 14. Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied. 15. There shall be no order as to costs. 16. 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