NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols

Widowed Daughters of Non-Government College Teachers Eligible for Family Pension: Cal HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Calcutta High Court, in a judgment delivered by The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, has ruled that widowed daughters of deceased teachers from Non-Government Colleges in West Bengal are eligible for family pension benefits. The judgment addresses a dispute over the entitlement to family pension and raises important questions regarding the classification between teachers of Government and Non-Government Colleges for pensionary benefits.

The court observed that the petitioner's mother, who served as a lecturer in a Non-Government College, had been receiving a pension until her passing. Following the untimely demise of the petitioner’s husband, who was the sole breadwinner of her family, she sought family pension support. However, the Director of Public Instruction, Government of West Bengal, denied her claim, citing specific guidelines.

In a noteworthy legal point, the court examined the constitutional validity of the classification between teachers of Government and Non-Government Colleges for pension benefits. The court referred to previous rulings that emphasized the need for parity between these two groups. The exclusion of a widowed daughter from the definition of ‘family’ for family pension was also called into question. The court invoked Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India and concluded that the classification was arbitrary and violated constitutional provisions.

Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee stated, “The classification made between a teacher of a Non-Government College and a teacher of a Government College or a Government Employee, particularly in respect of grant of pensionary benefits, has been held to be arbitrary by the Hon’ble Division Bench in a previous case, and such a decision has attained its finality.”

The court further highlighted the socio-economic importance of family pension schemes, emphasizing their role in assisting dependents and families in financial crises following the death of an employee or pensioner.

High Court set aside the Director of Public Instruction’s order denying family pension and directed the release of family pension if the petitioner meets the dependency criteria. Additionally, the court suggested the framing of rules to include widowed daughters in the definition of ‘family’ for family pension eligibility.

Date of Decision: 30.11.2023

Smt. Sahana Shome Mondal VS State of West Bengal & Ors.   

Latest Legal News