For The vs S.M.Chakraborty
2021 Latest Caselaw 57 Tri

        Page 1 of 7


HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
      AGARTALA

IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 149 OF 2019
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 239 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 240 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 242 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 243 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 246 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 251 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 252 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 253 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 256 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 258 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 259 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 260 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 268 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 270 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 271 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 272 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 274 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 277 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 278 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 287 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 288 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 289 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 291 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 292 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 293 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 294 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 295 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 296 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 297 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 298 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 299 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 300 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 301 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 302 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 303 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 304 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 305 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 306 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 308 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 309 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 311 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 312 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 313 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 314 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 315 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 316 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 318 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 319 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 321 OF 2020
          Page 2 of 7




 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 322 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 324 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 327 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 329 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 331 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 332 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 333 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 335 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 336 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 337 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 341 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 342 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 343 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 344 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 346 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 347 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 348 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 351 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 352 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 353 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 355 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 356 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 357 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 358 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 359 OF 2020
 IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 360 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 362 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 363 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 364 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 365 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 366 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 371 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 373 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 376 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 377 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 378 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 381 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 383 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 385 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 386 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 406 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 407 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 408 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 409 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 411 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 412 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 413 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 414 OF 2020
IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 416 OF 2020
                                          Page 3 of 7



                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 417 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 419 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 420 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 421 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 426 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 427 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 430 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 435 OF 2020
                               IA NO 1 OF 2020 IN WA 446 OF 2020



     For the appellant-               : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
     applicant (s)
     For the respondent(s)            : Mr. S.M.Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate.

Mr. Raju Datta, Advocate

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

Order 11/01/2021 (A.Kureshi,CJ)

Leave to amend the prayer clause in respective writ appeals.

This group of writ appeals with connected interim applications

have rather unusual history.

Such factual background was recorded in an order dated

05.10.2020 passed in IA No.1 of 2019 in WA No.148 of 2019 which also

arose out of the judgment of the Single Judge dated 20th February, 2017 in

case of Ajoy Mallik Vrs. State of Tripura & Ors. The said proceedings had

identical factual background and the said order, may therefore, be reproduced.

"Writ appeal is filed by the State Government to challenge a common judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20th February, 2017 passed in WP(C) No.491/2016 in case of Ajoy Mallik Vs State of Tripura and others connected petitions, as well as a further order of 9th November, 2017 passed in Review Petition No.29/2017 filed by one Sri Gouranga Debnath

who was one of the petitioners whose petition came to be disposed of by the aforementioned judgment dated 20th February, 2017. While allowing the review petition and granting benefit of back wages on the basis of higher salary payable to the petitioners as per the original judgment dated 20th February 2017, the learned Single Judge clarified that that order shall apply in respect of all writ petitioners whose writ petitions were disposed of by the said common judgment.

By the said common judgment dated 20 th February 2017, large numbers of writ petitions were disposed of by the learned Single Judge. Each petition in turn contained several writ petitioners. Previously, this writ appeal along with other connected appeals and writ petitions was disposed of by the Division Bench by a judgment dated 9th September, 2019. The additional relief granted for arrears of salary by the learned Single Judge in the review order dated 9th November, 2017 was set aside. However, subsequently, some of the original writ petitioners raised the grievance that the writ appeals were disposed of without hearing them and without condoning delay. The said judgment of the Division Bench, therefore, qua this writ appeal was recalled by an order dated 11th March, 2020.

While passing the said order dated 11th March 2020, our intention was clear, clearly stated during the course of the discussion that we were recalling the judgment only qua those who have sought a review before us. Unfortunately, at that time it was not brought to our notice that in a single writ appeal, the Government has clubbed judgement disposing of several writ petitions for challenge. It was the duty of the Government Advocate to bring it to our notice. Far more importantly, it was the duty of the counsel for the review petitioners to bring this factor to our notice. Unfortunately, they both failed to do so. Accordingly, when we recalled the judgment dated 9th September, 2019 of the Division Bench, making it clear that the same was qua only WA No.146/2019, totally unintended, it amounted to recalling the judgment covering large number of petitions where none of the petitioners had even requested for a review. They were thus not aggrieved by the order of the Division Bench. This unfortunate turn of events is on account of lack on part of the advocates concerned to bring it to our notice these unusual phenomena where one State appeal encompassed large

number of writ petitions. Learned counsel Mr. Raju Datta who appears for the review petitioners owed a moral duty to us to bring this to our notice. We are sorry to record that he failed to discharge such duty. We restrain ourselves from recording that it was deliberate.

Our intention while recalling the previous judgement thus was and could not have been to recall the same qua those who had not sought the review at all. The learned single judge in his judgement disposing of the writ petitions had granted the benefit of higher pay without any reference to arrears. In the review judgement, arrears were made payable. The State had challenged both these orders. The Division Bench had allowed the Appeal of the State only to the extent of arrears. Thus, initial judgement of the learned single judge was not disturbed. To that extent, the original petitioners were successful even before the Division Bench. While the judgement of the Division Bench in WPA was recalled, it stood recalled in its entirety. The WPA would be heard afresh with the possibility of it being allowed totally unlike in the earlier occasion when it was allowed only in part. Such a situation can never be brought about in case of those petitioners who did not seek review and were satisfied with the result of the outcome in the WLA Under the circumstances, it is clarified that our order dated 11th March, 2020 recalling the Division Bench judgment in WA No.146/2019 would apply only qua the petitioners of the review petition. In the process, writ appeal No.146/2020 would stand revived only for this limited purpose in relation to the petitions of the review petitioners. While recalling the order we had made it clear to the learned counsel for the review petitioners that we would hear the delay condonation petition if the State Government so files and if we condoned the delay, also the writ appeal finally. He had agreed to such terms. Accordingly, he agreed that the State Government has also served a copy of the delay condonation petition to him.

Accordingly, we have heard learned advocates appearing for the parties for final disposal of delay condonation petition as well as writ appeal.Order and judgment reserved."

From the above, it can be seen that at one stage the Division

Bench of this Court had set aside the order dated 9 th November, 2017 passed

in Review Petition No.29/2017 by the learned Single Judge. However,

subsequently some of the petitioners who were the beneficiaries of the order

of the Single Judge in Review Petition, filed Review Petitions before the

Division Bench and raised the grievances that without hearing them and

without condoning delay in filing Writ Appeal by the Government, the

Division Bench proceeded to decide the Writ Appeal of the Government. The

Review Petitions were allowed and as explained in the above noted order

dated 05.10.2020 in IA No.1 of 2019 in WA 148/2019, the judgment of the

Division Bench which was detrimental to original petitioners was recalled qua

the review petitioners only.

Consequently, the State's writ appeal qua such aggrieved parties

stood revived.

In order to complete the procedure and formalities, the

Government has now filed separate writ appeals qua each writ petition that the

learned Single Judge had dealt with and corresponding interim applications

seeking codonation delay have been filed.

Previously we had put the parties to notice i.e. learned Addl.

Govt. Advocate, Sri Mangal Debbarma for the appellants and Sri

S.M.Chakraborty, senior counsel appearing for the respective respondents i.e.

the original petitioners, assisted by counsel Sri Raju Datta that we would

proceed to hear the delay condonation petitions as well as Writ Appeals

simultaneously so that both sides may be sufficiently prepared to advance their

arguments on both the proceedings. Accordingly, we have heard learned

counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. The respondents

have filed affidavit opposing the condonation of delay. Such single affidavit

would be treated as having been filed by all the respondents in the respective

Writ Appeals.

Order and judgment reserved in interim applications as well as

Writ Appeals.

               (ARINDAM LODH), J                   (AKIL KURESHI),CJ.




      sanjay