Gita Devi vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors.

The matter relates to family pension. The petitioner’s husband was an employee of Kharagpur municipality. Unfortunately, the petitioner’s husband died on 6^th June, 2020 at the age of 55 years. The petitioner is at present being disbursed ad hoc pension by the municipality. When the writ petition came up for consideration, this Court by an order dated 12^th May, 2026 had directed the executive Officer of the municipality along with the finance officer, if any, to jointly file a report before this Court as regards the allegations made in the writ petition especially with regard to the non-payment of gratuity and pension.

Pursuant to the aforesaid direction on 8^th June, 2026 a report was filed by the municipality claiming that all steps for issuance of the PPO by the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance (DPPG) has been taken. Though, initially an audit objection was raised by the officer of the DPPG, however, such objection no longer survives as appropriate steps have been taken by the municipality. It was, however, submitted on behalf of the municipality that in the peculiar facts, on the aforesaid date since the State remained unrepresented, this Court had directed the petitioner to serve a copy of the order on the office of the learned Government pleader. Subsequently, on 16^th June, 2026, despite service of notice on the office of the learned Government Pleader since the State was not represented, this Court had appointed Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate who usually appears for the State to take instruction in the matter. Since then, by order dated 14^th July, 2026 the DPPG was directed to file a report. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the report in the form of the an affidavit has been filed by the respondent No. 3 being the DPPG. In the aforesaid report, it has been stated that upon re-submission of the petitioner’s pension papers by the pension sanctioning authority that is Chairman, Kharagpur municipality to the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, the same was processed and PPO has been issued on 23^rd June, 2026. A copy of the PPO has been enclosed to the report. Let a copy of the report filed in Court today be taken on record.

Today, the learned advocate for the municipality has also placed before this Court a note sheet dated 3^rd August, 2026 and would submit that the entire gratuity as is payable to the petitioner has since been disbursed. Let the copy of the aforesaid note-sheet as placed before this Court by the municipality be taken on record.

Having regard to the above and noting that gratuity has now been disbursed though belatedly, in my view justice would be sub-served if interest at the rate of 8% on the delayed payment of gratuity is paid to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest on the outstanding amount of gratuity from the date of issuance of the PPO till the same was actually disbursed at the rate of 8% per annum.

Since no other issue survives in the writ petition, the same is accordingly disposed of.