21.09.2026 Item No.2 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Appellate Side WPA No.14494 of 2024 Mousumi Karmakar Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Debjani Sengupta Ms. Koyel Bag Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee … for the Petitioner Mr. Mihir Kumar Das Ms. Anyasha Das … for the State 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the records. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the stoppage of house rent allowance (HRA) that she was receiving as per her entitlement without any notice. 3. It has been submitted that the petitioner was receiving HRA @ Rs.2,657/- per month till December 2017. The same was abruptly stopped on and from January 2018. No reason whatsoever has been disclosed for stoppage or decrease of the HRA. 4. The petitioner assumes that as her husband is working in a private organization, the authority may have stopped the HRA which she is entitled to in accordance with law. 5. In support of the aforesaid submission, reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by the Court on 16th March, 2021 in a batch of writ petitions first of which is WPA 1389 of 2018 (Mousumi Biswas & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein the Court held that notwithstanding the spouse engaged in private employment and enjoying HRA, full benefit of HRA ought to be allowed to the teacher. 6. The petitioner prays for a direction upon the District Inspector of Schools for releasing the arrear HRA and regularization of her HRA as laid down by the Court in the matter of Mousumi Biswas (supra). 7. Learned counsel representing the State respondents submits that the issue may be decided in line with the decision laid down by the Court in the matter of Mousumi Biswas (supra). 8. Whether the teacher would be entitled to receive house rent allowance if the spouse receives house rent allowance from the employer has been decided by the Court in Mousumi Biswas (supra). 9. The Court was pleased to hold that the employer does not have any right to deduct house rent allowance from the teacher even if the spouse received house rent allowance from the employer of a private organization. 10. In view of the law laid down by the Court in the matter of Mousumi Biswas (supra), the respondent authorities cannot withhold house rent allowance of the petitioner as the spouse of the petitioner does not receive house rent allowance from any government organization. 11. The instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Howrah being the respondent no. 5 herein to ascertain as to whether the spouse of the petitioner is working in a government organization or not and thereafter take a decision on the prayer of the petitioner seeking release of her house rent allowance strictly in line with the law laid down by the Court in the matter of Mousumi Biswas (supra). 2 12. A decision shall be taken at the earliest but positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. 13. An opportunity of hearing shall be given to the petitioner for production of documents in support of the house rent allowance drawn by her spouse, if any. 14. If the prayer of the petitioner is allowed, then steps for releasing the house rent allowance in favour of the petitioner shall be taken without any further delay. 15. As the petitioner will receive house rent allowance at a delayed point of time, accordingly, the petitioner would be entitled to receive interest on account of the delayed payment. 16. The dues of the petitioner shall be released with interest calculated at the rate of six per cent per annum on and from the due date till the date of actual payment. 17. The writ petition stands disposed of. 18. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 19. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. [Amrita Sinha, J] 3