Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44772 (CAL)

MANJURI DAS v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/6414/2026 · 2026-09-22

Bivas Pattanayak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

22.09.2026 Sl. No.40(DL) Ct. No.14 srm IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 6414 of 2026 Manjuri Das Versus The State of West Bengal & ors. Mr. Sourav Mitra, Mr. Goutam Kumar Maity …for the Petitioner Mr. Bikash Chandra Das, Mr. Somraj Ganguly … for the State 1. Affidavits-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner are taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks permission to deposit the employer’s share in Contributory Provident Fund with interest and additional interest in order to avail the benefit of pension. 3. The petitioner contends that her husband, late Somesh Kumar Das was an approved Head Teacher of Bakultala MGS Free Primary School, District-South 24-Parganas. The petitioner’s husband died-in-harness on 26th August, 1991. The petitioner’s husband exercised option under ROPA 1990. The petitioner being the widow of the deceased employee intends to deposit the Government’s share in Contributory Provident Fund with interest and additional interest in 2 order to avail the benefit of family pension. Hence, this writ petition. 4. Mr. Sourav Mitra, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that since the husband of the petitioner exercised option under ROPA 1990 a fresh option would not be required. However, the grant of family pension will be subject to refund of the Government’s share of Contributory Provident Fund together with interest and additional interest. To buttress his contention, he relies on a decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court passed in State of West Bengal versus Sefali Jana (In Re: FMA 620 of 2022) as well as a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Santilata Mahato versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. (In Re: WPA 16272 of 2025). 5. On the contrary, Mr. Bikash Chandra Das, learned advocate for the State submits that as per G.O. 749- SE(L)/AL/5S-56/13(pt-V) dated 13th June, 2014 the option to switch over from CPF to GPF scheme was to be made within a period of three months from date of issuance of that GO. The petitioner has not opted within the said period and therefore the question of switching over at this stage cannot be accorded. He seeks for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. It is no more res integra that once an option under ROPA-1990 is exercised by the employee a fresh option is not required. In this regard, this Court finds 3 substance in the submission of Mr. Mitra relying on Sefali Jana (supra) and Santilata Mahato (supra). 7. In line with the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench as well Coordinate Bench of this Court, the respondent No.4, District Inspector of Schools (P.E), South 24-Parganas is directed to calculate the amount of government’s share of contributory provident together with interest and additional interest required to be refunded by the petitioner to get the benefit of family pension. Upon deposit of the said amount, the said respondent being the pension sanctioning authority shall verify the pension papers of the petitioner’s husband and sent the same to the respondent No.3, Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal for further steps to be taken in accordance with law for issuance of the Pension Payment Order in favour of the petitioner. 8. The respondent Nos.4 and 3 shall complete the respective exercise as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication of this order and the pension shall be paid to the petitioner on and from the date following the date of death of the petitioner’s husband. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition being WPA 6414 of 2026 stands disposed of. 10. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 4 11. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 12. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 13. There shall be no order as to costs. 14. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 15. 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.)