Dr. Amiya Bhushan Majumder vs The State Of Tripura And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 785 Tri

                                    Page - 1 of 2




                        HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                              AGARTALA

                                 WP(C) No.516/2021
Dr. Amiya Bhushan Majumder
                                                      ............ Petitioner(s).
             - Vs. -
The State of Tripura and Ors.
                                                     ............ Respondent(s).

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B N Majumder, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rajib Saha, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Debalaya Bhattacharya, Govt. Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI

_O_R_D_E_ R_

20/8/2021 (Akil Kureshi, CJ).

Petitioner has made two prayers. First is for quashing a show case

notice, dated 22nd July 2021, as at Annexure-5. The second prayer of the

petitioner is to remove respondent No.3 from the position of Director of

Animal Resources Development Department, Government of Tripura.

These two prayers are unrelated. In any case, it is doubtful

whether at the hand of the petitioner who has no direct connection with the

post of Director, the legality of the posting of respondent No.3 as a Director

can be questioned unless the same falls within a public interest parameters

and such a public interest petition is filed. This prayer is, therefore, not

entertained in this petition.

Page - 2 of 2

The sole surviving prayer is with respect to quashing of a show

cause case notice under which the petitioner is asked to explain why

departmental inquiry should not be initiated against the petitioner for

allegedly obtaining unauthorised copies of official documents and using the

same for the purpose of filing a writ petition before the High Court.

Whatever the grounds of the petitioner, he must raise before the

authority who has issued the show cause notice and point out why the

departmental inquiry should not or could not be initiated. It is well-settled

through series of judgments that the Courts in exercise of writ jurisdiction

do not encourage challenge to show cause notice.

Under the circumstances, petition is dismissed. Pending

application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

( AKIL KURESHI, CJ )

Sukehendu