Calcutta High Court
WPA/10391/2026 of SWAPAN KUMAR JANA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 28 September 2026
Item No.28 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No.10391 of 2026 Swapan Kumar Jana -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Saibal Kumar Acharyya Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya Mr. K.P. Samanta Mr. S. Sarkar …for the
28-09-2026
Item No.28
Subrata
Bhattacharyya
AR(C)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
WPA No.10391 of 2026
Swapan Kumar Jana
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Saibal Kumar Acharyya
Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya
Mr. K.P. Samanta
Mr. S. Sarkar …for the petitioner
Mr. Anirudhya Dutta
Mr. Siddhartha Roy …for the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petiotner retired from service on attaining his normal age of superannuation on March 31, 2026. Immediately prior to his retirement, a direction was passed for recasting his pay and the petitioner was directed to refund the overdrawn amount paid to him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was paid in the proper scale of pay in accordance with the fixation by the Additional District Inspector of Schools, Kharagpur in November 2025. The petitioner was granted 3% additional increment on performing the job of the headmaster of the school upon upgradation of the same.
3. Prayer has been made to direct the respondents to release his terminal dues with interest on account of delayed payment.
4. Reliance has been placed on an order passed by this Court on August 4, 2026 in WPA No.16996 of 2026 (Amar Krishna Mandal v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.).
5. Reliance has also been placed on the order passed by this Court on July 13, 2026 in WPA No.14879 of 2022 (Bimal Kumar Mandal v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein the Court took note of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Punjab & Ors. v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors. reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334.
6. Learned counsel for the State relies on the instruction forwarded by the DI of Schools (SE), Paschim Medinipur signed on July 17, 2026 mentioning that direction for refund of the overdrawn amount has been rightly issued. The petitioner would not be entitled to receive 3% additional increment as the Government Order pursuant to which the increment was paid stood withdrawn by the authority.
7. Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and on perusal of the documents placed before this Court, it appears that the petitioner was paid additional increment relying upon the memo issued by the authority. The said memo stood withdrawn later on.
8. The issue of withdrawal of the 2010 notification in the year 2017 was challenged before the Court and the Hon’ble Division Bench on 7th January 2025 in FMA 981 of 2022 with IA No.CAN 1 of 2022 in the matter of Samarendranath Adak v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. was pleased to set aside and quash the impugned notification dated 22nd March 2017.
9. The Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to hold that the teacher would be entitled to grant of 3%
additional increment in terms of ROPA 2009 with effect from the date of appointment as headmaster or from the date of upgradation of the school, whichever is earlier.
10. On setting aside of the 2017 notification by which the petitioner was found to be drawing excess amount, the right of the petitioner to receive 3% additional increment in terms of the 2010 notification revived.
11. As the Hon’ble Division Bench already held that the teacher would be entitled to receive 3% additional increment, accordingly, the question of refund of any excess amount does not arise at all.
12. Moreover, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rafiq Masih (supra) laid down that recovery from retired employees and from employees who are due to retire within one year of the order of recovery is impermissible.
13. Accordingly, on both the aforesaid grounds, the direction passed by the authority to refund excess amount cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The same is set aside.
14. The DI of Schools is directed to re-fix the pay of the petitioner in terms of the fixation made by the ADI of Schools, Kharagpur Sub-Division on November 20, 2014 and pay all consequential benefits to the petitioner.
15. Steps shall be taken to prepare and issue the PPO at the earliest. The DI of Schools shall ensure that the petitioner receives his terminal dues positively by December 31, 2026.
16. As the petitioner would be receiving his dues after considerable delay, the terminal benefits shall be paid along with interest at the rate of 5% p.a. to be calculated on and from the date it fell due till the date of actual payment.
17. The impugned order of the DI of Schools directing refund of the overdrawn amount stands set aside.
18. The writ petition is disposed of.
19. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
20. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties. [Amrita Sinha, J]