Case Summary: Jaya Bhattacharya vs. State of West Bengal & Others (2025 INSC 270)
Facts:
• Jaya Bhattacharya was appointed as an L.D. Assistant in the Office of the Block Development Officer, Jhargram, on March 20, 1986.
• She remained absent from duty for 107 days initially and later from June 29, 1987, to July 12, 2007.
• She alleged that she was prevented from signing the attendance register and performing her duties.
• A show cause notice was issued against her for unauthorized absence, and she approached the Tribunal for relief.
• The West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal directed a departmental inquiry in 2003, but no such inquiry was conducted.
• In 2011, her absence was treated as extraordinary leave under Rule 175 and Rule 176(4) of the West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, meaning she was not entitled to salary during that period.
• She later applied for pension and other retirement benefits, but the authorities rejected her claim, stating that her period of extraordinary leave did not qualify for pensionable service.
• Her writ petition challenging this decision was dismissed due to non-prosecution, and subsequent review and restoration petitions also failed.
Issues:
1. Whether the appellant’s period of extraordinary leave (1987–2007) should be counted as qualifying service for pension benefits?
2. Whether the denial of pensionary benefits was justified in the absence of a departmental inquiry as directed by the Tribunal?
Judgment:
•The Supreme Court criticized the failure of authorities to conduct a departmental inquiry, which could have established whether she was prevented from working or was truly absent without authorization.
• Since the authorities regularized her absence by treating it as extraordinary leave, they could not later deny her pension by claiming the period as unauthorized absence.
• The Court held that denial of pension must be based on specific rules—and in this case, no valid rule supported the rejection of her pension.
•Therefore, the Court ruled that Bhattacharya is entitled to a pension, though she will not receive any arrears.
•The authorities were directed to finalize her pension within three months.
