DEBJANI CHAUDHURI AMRITA MAJI vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS — WPA/921/2026

Case under West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act ,1963 Section N/A. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED on 18th June 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 17-Jun-2026

CNR: WBCHCJ0023382026

Filing Number

WPA/938/2026

Filing Date

12-Jun-2026

Registration No

WPA/921/2026

Registration Date

15-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Secondary Education Post Retirement ( 28 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

18-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act ,1963 Section N/A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEBJANI CHAUDHURI AMRITA MAJI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas PattanayakView PDF

    The High Court at Calcutta held that the State's direction to retired Assistant Teacher Debjani Chaudhuri to deposit Rs. 3,38,658 as alleged salary overdrawing was impermissible in law. The court found that the overdrawing period (July 2009 to March 2025) exceeded five years before the recovery direction was issued post-retirement, violating Supreme Court principles established in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih. The court ordered refund of the deposited amount with 8% annual interest within six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jun-2026

    Interest On Gratuity

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  4. 17-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 12-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPA/921/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court at Calcutta held that the State's direction to retired Assistant Teacher Debjani Chaudhuri to deposit Rs. 3,38,658 as alleged salary overdrawing was impermissible in law. The court found that the overdrawing period (July 2009 to March 2025) exceeded five years before the recovery direction was issued post-retirement, violating Supreme Court principles established in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih. The court ordered refund of the deposited amount with 8% annual interest within six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case