Tripura High Court
Sri Mithan Debnath vs The State Of Tripura on 25 February, 2019
Bench: Sanjay Karol, S. Talapatra
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.470/2018
Sri Mithan Debnath, S/O. Sri Sailesh Chandra Debnath, resident of
Village:-East Jambura, P.O.:-Khowai Court, P.S.:- Khowai,
District-Khowai Tripura.
---- Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Commissioner &
Secretary, Education Department, Government of Tripura, having
his office at Secretariat Building, P.O.-Kunjaban, PS-New Capital
Complex, District-West Tripura, PIN-799006.
2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Finance Department,
Government of Tripura, having his office at Secretariat Building,
P.O.-Kunjaban, PS-New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura,
PIN-799006.
3. The Director of School Education, Education Department,
Government of Tripura, having his office at Shiksha Bhawan,
Office Lane, P.O.-Agartala, PS-West Agartala, District-West
Tripura.
---- Respondent(s).
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Advocate, Mr. Anujit Dey, Advocate, Mr. Koomar Chakraborty, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dipankar Sharma, Addl. G.A. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KAROL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA Order 25/02/2019 The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Certiorari and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, for directing them, to transmit the records, and for quashing/setting aside the Page 2 of 4 impugned Offer of Appointment, insofar as it grants a fixed monthly pay to the petitioner, thereby negating the benefits of seniority of the past services, rendered by the petitioner, regular pay scale, pay protection i.e., counting the past services for the purpose of fixation of pay, leave encashment, leave salary, gratuity and all other admissible service benefits, including pension, in defiance of the directions, contained in the Judgment & Order dated 07.05.2014, as affirmed, vide the Judgment & Order dated 23.3.2017;
(ii) Issue Rule, calling upon the Respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, for mandating/directing them, to revoke/rescind the impugned Offer of Appointment dated 14.03.2018, and thereupon, grant the benefits of seniority of the past services, rendered by the petitioner, regular pay scale, pay protection, i.e., counting the past services for the purpose of fixation of pay, leave encashment, leave salary, gratuity and all other admissible service benefits, including pension, as well as the arrears of salary and allowances, in conformity with the directions, contained in the Judgment & Order dated 07.05.2014, as affirmed, vide the Judgment & Order dated 23.03.2017;
(iii) Call for the records, appertaining to this petition;
(iv) After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the Rule absolute in terms of i. & ii. above;
(v) Costs of and incidental to this proceeding;Page 3 of 4
(vi) Any other Relief(s) as to this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper."
Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to place additional materials/representations, if so required and desired, in accordance with law.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the same.
As such, petition stands disposed of having been withdrawn in the following mutually agreed terms:
(1) Petitioner's representation shall be considered by the appropriate authority and decided expeditiously in accordance with law and positively within a period of three months from today.
(2) If so required and desired, it shall be open to the writ petitioner(s) to place additional materials in support of earlier representation, if any.
(3) Additionally, if so desired, petitioner(s) may also request for affording opportunity of hearing.
(4) The authority shall positively pass the order in the aforesaid terms, by assigning reasons and copy thereof shall also be supplied to the writ petitioner(s).
(5) Liberty is reserved to the writ petitioner(s) to independently approach the Court for assailing the order, if Page 4 of 4 so required and desired on the same and subsequent cause of action, in accordance with law.
(6) All issues are left open.
(S. TALAPATRA), J (SANJAY KAROL), CJ Pulak