Calcutta High Court
WPA/21848/2025 of TAPAN KUMAR SARKAR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 5 August 2026
Item no.M/L 1139 Court No. 24 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No. WPA 21848 of 2025 In the matter of : Tapan Kumar Sarkar …. Petitioner VS. The State of West Bengal & Ors. ….Respondents For the Petitioner:
05.08.2026
Item no.M/L 1139
Court No. 24
Pradip, A.R.(Ct.)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Case No.
WPA 21848 of 2025
In the matter of:
Tapan Kumar Sarkar
…. Petitioner
VS.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
….Respondents
For the Petitioner:
Ms. Arpita Saha
….Advocate
For the State:
Mr. Madhu Jana
Ms. Puja Sarkar
….Advocates
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. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. The petitioner is the husband of an Assistant Teacher of a school who died-in-harness on 26.05.2016. The e-Pension Payment Order was issued on 22.11.2017.
3. The petitioner alleges delay in releasing the terminal dues.
4. It appears that the instant writ petition has been filed in August, 2025 long after issuance of the Pension Payment Order. No explanation has been provided explaining the delay in approaching the Court.
5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India –vs- Tarsem Singh reported in (2008) 8 SCC 648 clearly laid down that in so far as consequential relief of recovery of arrear for the past period is concerned, relief shall be restricted only to a period of three years prior to the filing of the writ petition or from the date of demand made by the petitioner.
6. In the instant case the petitioner did not raise any demand before the respondents praying for release of interest on account of delay in
Page 2
making payment. The petitioners directly approached this Court praying for interest, that too, long after the PPO was issued.
7. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to exercise jurisdiction in the matter and grant any relief in favour of the petitioner.
8. The writ petition stands dismissed.
9. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
10. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)