Tripura High Court
Keshab Das Vrs. The State Of ... vs For The on 13 July, 2021
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 363 OF 2020
Keshab Das Vrs. The State of Tripura & 5 Ors.
Present:
For the petitioner (s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate.
For the respondent (s) : None.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
13.07.2021
Order
Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the
petitioner.
This is a third time litigation which has been filed by the
petitioner under compelling circumstances. By filing the instant writ
petition, the petitioner has questioned the memorandum dated 04.06.2020
wherein he was said to be promoted to the post of Sr. Attendant from the
post he is holding at present as Lab. Attendant, Central Laboratory. The
petitioner was asked to join the said promotional post within 15 th June,
2020 failing which his promotion would be treated as non acceptance of the
said order of promotion.
Mr. Deb, learned Sr. counsel has submitted that in the earlier
Writ Petition No.(C) 896 of 2016 filed by the petitioner against the
respondents, the following directions were made by the Court at Para 13,
which reads thus-
"13. Having observed thus, the writ petition is disposed of
with the following directions:
(i) The respondents shall determine the vacancies in the
post of the Office Assistant and thereafter create the zone of
consideration vis-a-vis the recruitment rules and the gradation list
of the feeder post if it is found that filling up of the vacancies is an
immediate necessity. In terms of the recruitment rules, the post of
Office Assistant is a selection post. The persons who are in zone of
consideration shall be assessed and those will be found suitable
may be appointed on promotion to the post of Office Assistant.
(ii) The respondents shall take up the exercise to find out
the vacancy in the post of Office Assistant and shall further take a
decision whether to fill up the required percentage of the vacancies
by way of promotion. In the event of taking such decision, the
exercise shall be completed within a period of 4(four) months from
the day when the petitioner shall submit a copy of this order to the
respondents through the respondent No.4.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs."
I have noticed that the said judgment was delivered on
28.02.2018. In terms of the judgment, the petitioner also filed a
representation on 07.05.2018 enclosing the copy of that judgment to the
Chief Executive Officer, Tripura Medical College and Dr. BRAM
Teaching Hospital, Hapania, West Tripura.
Mr. Deb, learned Sr. counsel has submitted that the
memorandum dated 04.06.2020 asking the petitioner to join to the post of
Sr. Attendant referring the said post as a promotional post is wholly illegal
and arbitrary for the reason that the post of Sr. Attendant and the Lab.
Attendant are both Group-D posts. Learned Sr. counsel further contends
that the post of Office Assistant being a Group-C post ought to have been
considered as a promotional post and the post of Office Assistant being a
Group-C post, the respondents are under obligation to promote the
petitioner in the said post of Office Assistant which would be inconformity
with the judgment and order passed by this court as quoted here-in-above
in WP(C) 896/2016.
None appears for the respondents, though the cause list
reflects that there are as many as 5 Advocates including the Government
Advocate. Even none of the learned counsels has sought for
accommodation. No counter affidavit has been filed.
I have considered the judgment and the directions issued by
this court in WP(C) 896/2016 and also have kept in mind the submissions
advanced by Mr. S. Deb, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Having perused the judgment and the directions, I direct the
respondents to apply their mind afresh to the directions as revealed at Para
13 of the aforesaid judgment which spoke about the promotion of the
petitioner to the post of Office Assistant.
In my opinion, the respondents have committed an error to
understand and construe the directions passed by this court in the said writ
petition promoting the petitioner to the post of Sr. Attendant which is not at
all a promotional post which is evinced from Para 3.2 of the instant writ
petition. It is further observed that it is a clear movement from one Group-
D post to another Group-D post in the garb of promotion of the petitioner
to the post of Sr. Attendant.
Having viewed thus, the instant writ petition stands disposed
with the direction that the respondents shall take appropriate steps to
consider the enforcement of the directions passed by this court in WP(C)
No. 896/2016 in its letter and spirit within a period of 30 days from the day
when the petitioner shall file a copy of this order to the respondents.
In view of the aforesaid observations and directions, the
memorandum dated 04.06.2020 issued by Narayan Debbarma, General
Manager, HR stands quashed since the post of Sr. Attendant is not at all the
promotional post under the service rule/recruitment rule applicable to the
institute of the respondents.
JUDGE
