State Cannot Prolong Delay In Releasing Employees' Pension Under Guise Of Public Interest & Accountability: Calcutta High Court

Background Facts

Sri Kunal Chandra Sen (Petitioner) was appointed as the Headmaster of Chandernagore Banga Vidyalaya on a temporary basis on December 20, 2004. Later he was appointed as the permanent Headmaster on February 1, 2005. The petitioner retired on July 31, 2015. On February 11, 2015, the pension papers were forwarded to the Assistant Director, Pension, Provident Fund, and Group Insurance for approval. On July 9, 2015, Ashok Kumar Sah, a local MLA, filed a complaint against the petitioner, alleging misappropriation of funds.

An initial enquiry by the Assistant Inspector of School, Secondary Education, on October 15, 2015, discharged the petitioner from all allegations. A subsequent enquiry report on December 9, 2015, by the Assistant Inspector of School (Secondary Education), also found no basis for the allegations. Despite these reports, the Chandernagore Municipality constituted a Fact-Finding Committee on December 22, 2015, to conduct a fresh enquiry. The petitioner applied for a No Liability Certificate, but despite the clearance from previous enquiries, his pension and gratuity were not issued.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition.

The petitioner contended that the allegations of financial misappropriation and the subsequent complaint by the local MLA were baseless and unfounded. The petitioner challenged the legitimacy and necessity of the Fact-Finding Committee constituted by the Chandernagore Municipality, arguing that it was redundant given the prior enquiries that had already cleared him. Petitioner further contended that he had applied for a No Liability Certificate, which was withheld without sufficient grounds despite the clearance from previous enquiries, further delaying his retirement benefits.

On the other hand, it was contended by the Respondents (State) that there were allegations of financial misappropriation against the petitioner, which warranted thorough investigation before processing his pension and gratuity. The respondents submitted that Section 29 of The West Bengal Municipal Corporation Act, 2006, provides the board of councillors the authority and power to constitute a Special Committee for the discharge of any specific function or for making enquiry and report in any specific matter. The respondents further contended that issuance of a No Liability Certificate was contingent upon the completion of all necessary investigations and the clearance of all allegations, which were not conclusively resolved.

Findings of the Court

The court observed that the petitioner had already been absolved by two separate enquiry reports which did not find any wrongdoing on his part, suggesting that the primary allegations against him had been addressed. The court found that the delay in the disbursement of the petitioner's pension and gratuity was unjustified. The court observed that the Fact-Finding Committee was set up after the petitioner had already been absolved by prior enquiries, raising questions about the committee's justification and purpose.

The court balanced the need for thorough investigations against the petitioner's right to timely retirement benefits. It held that the respondents' actions, under the guise of public interest and accountability, lacked sufficient justification for the prolonged delay.

The court emphasized that the petitioner was entitled to a No Liability Certificate, considering the enquiries had cleared him. It found the withholding of this certificate by the respondents to be unjustifiable and an undue obstruction to the petitioner's rights. The court directed the respondents to release the pension and gratuity of the petitioner. It also ordered the issuance of the No Liability Certificate to the petitioner, clearing the way for the processing of his retirement benefits.

With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition was allowed.

Case No. : WPA 3618 of 2016

Case Name : Sri Kunal Chandra Sen vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Counsel for the Petitioner : Soumya Majumdar, Adv.

Counsel for the Respondents : Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, Adv.