Tripura High Court
Mr. Cs Sinha vs Mr. D. Sarma on 17 April, 2019
Author: Arindam Lodh
Bench: Arindam Lodh
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 513/2019
PRESENT
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. CS Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 17/04/2019 Heard Mr. CS Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. GA appearing for the State- respondents.
By means of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for providing her 3(three) non-compoundable advance increments for acquiring Ph.D. degree vide notification dated 02.02.2010 along with other two college teachers, namely Sri Anup Kumar Datta and Sri Umasankar Roy.
The petitioner entered into service as Assistant Professor with educational qualification of M.Sc. and obtained Ph.D. degree on 30.10.2006 while in service. In February, 2010 he was provided with 2(two) advance increments for securing Ph.D. degree while in service, whereas, as per notification dated 02.02.2010, he was entitled to 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments from the date of acquiring the said Ph.D. degree.
The petitioner made representations on 21.05.2015 and on 19.01.2016 to the Director of Higher Education to get the benefit of 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments as per notification dated 02.02.2010 for acquiring Ph.D. degree while in service but his prayer remained unattended.
Page 2 of 3The petitioner has further stated that Dr. Shyamal Debnath, Dr. Anjali Chakraborty and Dr. Anup Kumar Datta, who were also provided with 2(two) advance increments for securing Ph.D. degree while in service, approached this Court by way of filing writ petition seeking direction upon the respondent-authorities to provide them 3(three) non-compoundable advance increments for their securing Ph.D. degree while in service in accordance with the revised pay scale of teachers in the Government college, etc. and adjustment of advance increments that were given previously. This Court decided the case on 15.10.2015 and in terms of the judgment of this Court dated 15.10.2015 they submitted representations. In pursuance of those representations, the respondents issued a memorandum dated 26.11.2015 wherein the aforesaid three college teachers who were the petitioners of those writ petitions were provided with the benefit of 3(three) non-compoundable advance increments with effect from their respective dates of securing Ph.D. degree. Since the petitioner did not file any writ petition for getting the same relief, in pursuance of the judgment of this Court dated 15.10.2015 he submitted representations to the competent authority. It is his grievance that he was allowed only 2(two) non-compoundable advance increments but was deprived of his entitlement to enjoy all the 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments.
Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition for a direction upon the respondents to grant him 3(three) non-compoundable advance increments due to his obtaining Ph.D. degree along with other 2(two) persons vide notification dated 02.02.2010.
Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. G.A. did not assign any reason of discriminating the petitioner for not having the benefit of his 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments.
Page 3 of 3
I have gone through the judgment dated 15.10.2015 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.374 of 2011, wherein I find that the petitioners of that writ petition along with other similarly situated college teachers were allowed to submit representations for granting of 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments for their securing Ph.D. degree. The petitioner of this writ petition also submitted representation, but, he has stated in the writ petition that his representation remained unattended. After perusing the records and considering the submissions of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, I find no reason to deprive the petitioner for not having the grant of benefit of all the 3(three) non- compoundable advance increments while other similarly situated persons were granted with the same benefit.
Keeping in mind the fact that other similarly situated college teachers, who secured Ph.D. degree at the same time as that of the petitioner, I am of the view that the present petitioner is also entitled with the same benefit. Accordingly, I direct the respondents to grant the petitioner all the 3(three) non-compoundable advance increments within a period of 6(six) weeks from today failing which the petitioner will be entitled to demand 6(six) percent interest from the respondents.
With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition is allowed and, accordingly, stands disposed.
JUDGE Saikat