Tripura High Court
Ms. S. Debgupta vs Mr. D. Sarma on 19 April, 2021
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 41/2021
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. S. Debgupta, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Order
19/04/2021
Heard Ms. S. Debgupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
as well as Mr. D. Sarma, learned Additional GA for the State-
respondents.
By means of filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for
the following reliefs:
(i) Admit this petition of the petitioners and call for records
relevant to the subject matter from the custody of the
respondents;
(ii) Issue writ directing the respondents for declaring the
entitlement of second ACP of the petitioners as per 10(2) of
the ROP Rules, 2009 as they got only one promotion and
thereby consumed the benefit of one ACP and when the
petitioners completed seventeen years of service in the
Department of Co-operation, Govt. of Tripura they are
entitled to second ACP i.e. scale No. 13 i.e. Rs. 7,450-
13,000/-, corresponding to revisional pay of Rs. 10230-
34800/- in PB-3, GP-4800/-;
(iii) Issue writ directing the respondent no. 4 to set aside the
communication dated 27.04.2016 and to allow the petitioners
ACP-II benefit in the pre-revised scale Rs. 7450-13000/-,
corresponding to revisional pay of Rs. 10230-34800/- in PB-
3, GP-4800/- as per pay scale No. 13 of the Part-D of the
ROP Rules, 2009 and thereafter;
(iv) Issue writ directing the respondents cancelling/quashing the
clarification of the Finance Department issued vide
memorandum dated 14.09.2009 point No. 10 as the said
clarification override the provision of Rule 10(2) of the ROP
Rules, 2009;
(v) Pass such other or further order/orders and/or direction/
directions as to Your Lordship deem fit and proper having
regard to the facts and circumstances of the case;
(vi) For this act of kindness your humble petitioners shall as in
duty bound shall ever pray.
Ms. Debgupta, learned counsel has submitted that even after
completion of 17 years of service, in view of the clarification issued by
the Finance Department, Government of Tripura dated 14.09.2009, the
petitioners were not granted the benefit of ACP-II. Placing reliance of the
judgment of this court in WP(C) 371 of 2014 [titled as Harisadhan
Adhikari and others vs. The State of Tripura and others], Ms. Debgupta,
learned counsel would contend that in the said case similar question arose
and, the court held that clarification dated 14.09.2009 cannot override the
provision of Rule 10(2) of the ROP Rules, 2009. Therefore, the
clarification cannot take away the right of the petitioners which is
prescribed by rules. Rule 10(2) clearly prescribes that one ACP or one
promotion should be considered as one unit and because of one
promotion the petitioners jumped one pay scale that cannot be said that
they got the benefit of two scale upgradation and, therefore, they shall be
deprived of the second ACP. In view of this, the submission of Mr.
Sarma, learned Additional GA that the petitioners have received the
second ACP stands repelled.
Without entering into further discussion, Ms. Debgupta, learned
counsel has submitted that if the petitioners are granted ACP-II after
completion of 17 years of service, then, she has no grievance.
In the light of settled proposition, this writ petition is disposed off with
a direction upon the State-respondents to grant ACP-II to the petitioners
in the prescribed pay scale, if they have completed total 17 years of their
service from the date of initial entry into their service, within a period of
6 (six) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
With the above observation and direction, the instant writ petition
stands allowed and thus, disposed off.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed.
JUDGE
Saikat
