Tripura High Court

The State Of Tripura vs Sri Praloy Goswami on 16 March, 2021

                                   Page - 1 of 16




                        HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                              AGARTALA
                              W.A No. 163 of 2019

1. The State of Tripura,
   represented by its Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of Food, Civil
   Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New
   Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

2. The Director,
   Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O.
   Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director
   Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S.
   Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner,
   Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital
   Complex, District: West Tripura
                                                              -----Appellant(s)
                                                  (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Praloy Goswami Son of Balai Goswami, resident of South Ramnagar, P.O. Agartala, P.S West Agartala, District West Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 152 of 2019

1. The State of Tripura, represented by its Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura Page - 2 of 16

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Suman Deb Son of Late Sushil Ch Deb, resident of A.D. Nagar, P.O. & P.S A.D. Nagar, District: West Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 153 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Jiten Singh @ Giten Singha Son of Late Mitleng Singha, resident of Kamarkandi, P.O. Noorpur, P.S Kailashahar, District: Unakoti Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition) Page - 3 of 16

W.A No. 154 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Badal Chakraborty Son of Late Jagabandhu Chakraborty, resident of South Badharghat, P.O. Siddhi Ashram, P.S Amtali, District: West Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 155 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura Page - 4 of 16

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Sanju Singha Son of Sri Suna Babu Singha, resident of Baraithal, P.O. Kameswar, P.S Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 156 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Swapan Acharjee Son of Lt. Manoranjan Acharjee, resident of West Pratapgarh, P.O. & PS A.D. Nagar, District: West Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition) Page - 5 of 16

W.A No. 157 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Tiklu Chandra Dey Son of Sri Madhab Chandra Dey, resident of Muhuripur, P.S Baikhura, District: South Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 158 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura Page - 6 of 16

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Bipan Chakraborty Son of Lt. Bimal Chakraborty, resident of A.D. Nagar, P.O. & P.S A.D. Nagar, District: West Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 159 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Mantosh Datta Son of Sri Bablu Datta, resident of Pachim Batarasi, P.O. Rajbari, P.S Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 160 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition)

Versus

Sri Swapan Acharjee Son of Lt. Chandra Mohan Acharjee, resident of Udaipur, P.O & P.S R.K Pur, District: Gomati Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

W.A No. 161 of 2019

2. The Director, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

3. The Deputy Director Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.O & P.S. Dharmanagar, District: North Tripura

4. The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura

-----Appellant(s) (Respondents in writ petition) Page - 8 of 16

Versus

Sri Krishna Debnath Son of Sri Dulal Debnath, resident of South Charilam, P.O. Charilam, P.S Bishramganj, District: South Tripura

-----Respondent(s) (Petitioner in writ petition)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. GA. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arijit Bhowmik, Advocate.

Mr. Ankan Tilak Paul, Advocate.

Date of Judgment & Order : 16th March, 2021.

Whether fit for reporting     :     NO.


                                    B_E_F_O_R_E_

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

(Akil Kureshi, CJ)

These appeals are filed by the State Government to challenge the

judgment dated 07.02.2019 passed in W.P(C) No. 170 of 2018 and connected

petitions in case of Sri Tiklu Chandra Dey Vs. The State of Tripura & Ors. By the

said judgment the learned Single Judge gave directions for regularizing the

petitioners in terms of Government of Tripura policy contained in memorandum

dated 21.01.2009. The service particulars of the petitioners can be recorded from

the judgment of learned Single Judge as under:


 Sl. No.     Name of the writ petitioner with Date of engagement   Date of completion of
             writ petition No.                as the full time     ten years as full time
                                              casual worker        casual worker
     1.      Pralay Goswami, the writ 01.05.2005                   30.04.2015
             petitioner in W.P.(C) No.166 of
                                       Page - 9 of 16





      2.    Jiten Singh @ Giten Singha, the     12.05.2001      11.05.2011
            writ petitioner in W.P.(C)
            No.167 of 2018
      3.    Bipan Chakraborty, the writ         May,2003        May, 2013
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.168 of

      4.    Mantosh Datta, the writ             01.12.2003      30.11.2013
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.169 of

      5.    Tiklu Ch. Dey, the writ             08.11.2001      07.11.2011
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.170 of

      6.    Suman Deb, the writ petitioner      10.03.2004      09.03.2014
            in W.P.(C) No.171 of 2018
      7.    Swapan Acharjee, the writ           10.03.2004      09.03.2014
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.172 of

      8.    Swapan Acharjee, the writ           14.11.2002      13.11.2012
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.173 of

      9.    Krishna Debnath, the writ           14.11.2002      13.11.2012
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.174 of

      10.   Badal Chakraborty, the writ         January, 2005   January, 2015
            petitioner in W.P.(C) No.175 of

      11.   Sanju Singha, the writ petitioner   01.04.2006      31.03.2016
            in W.P.(C) No.221 of 2018




[2]           The Government of Tripura had formulated a policy circulated under

OM dated 21.01.2009 for granting regularization to casual workers and DRWs

upon completion of 10(ten) years of service. The petitioners had claimed benefit of

the said memorandum. However, the prime objection of the Government to the

services of the petitioners being regularized in terms of the said OM was that,

majority of them were engaged after 31.03.2003. The Government would point out

that under OM dated 9th June, 2004 directives were issued by the State Page - 10 of 16

Government against engagement of casual workers after 31.03.2003 without prior

concurrence of the Finance Department. In this context, in the said OM it was

further provided that:

"(vi) All concerned shall immediately terminate those DRW/Part Time/Contingent/Casual/Fixed Pay/Contract etc. workers who have been engaged after 31-03-2003 without concurrence of the Finance Department. All the concerned Departments shall submit a report within 15-06-2004 continuing action taken in the regards."

[3] According to the Government thus the benefit of the regularization

scheme contained in the OM dated 21.01.2009 would not be available to those

workers who were engaged after 31.03.2003.

[4] Previously when this appeal was heard, learned advocate Mr. Arijit

Bhowmik for the original petitioners had contended that in the past such an issue

was considered by the Single Judges and despite the said cut off date of

31.03.2003, directions were issued for granting the benefit of the scheme of

regularization to workers engaged after the said date on the ground that they were

continued uninterruptedly for a long period of time and their services were not

terminated despite the directives contained in the OM dated 9th June, 2004. He had

also stated that these judgments have been complied by the Government without

preferring appeals. Today he placed on record five different orders passed by the

learned Single Judge for regularization of such casual workers who were engaged Page - 11 of 16

after 31.03.2003 and stated that all these judgments have been complied and State

Government has regularized the services of these workers.

[5] Ordinarily we would have examined the contention of the

Government that the scheme of regularization framed by the State of Tripura in

the year 2009 would not cover those casual workers who were engaged after

31.03.2003. However we find that in several cases this objection was overruled

by the Single Judges and the Government had accepted the decisions. Surely in

matters of regularization of casual workers, the Government cannot adopt pick

and choose policy, choosing to comply with the directions in a particular matter

and to challenge in another. There has to be consistency in the Government stand

regarding such policy issues. In other words if the Government has accepted the

judgments and the interpretation of memorandum concerning regularization of

casual workers in one set of cases, without any explanation or distinction in facts

of other set of cases, the Government cannot challenge another judgment

rendered in similar background.

[6] We have perused different orders placed on record by Mr. Arijit

Bhowmik, learned counsel for the original petitioners. In case of Sri Ajit Debnath

Vs. The State of Tripura & Ors. [W.P(C) No.1255 of 2016] and connected petitions

decided by the learned Single Judge on 23.06.2017, this issue was specifically

raised as can be seen from the following observations:

Page - 12 of 16

"7. From the Para-6 of the reply, what surfaces for relevant consideration is that, according to the respondents, those who are engaged prior to 31.3.2003 are only competent to be regularised in terms of the said memorandum dated 21.01.2009, not others."

[7] In this context while overruling the objection of the Government the

learned Single Judge made following observations:

"9. Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned G.A. has further submitted that on the basis of the memorandum dated 18.12.2012 [Annexure R/2] another exercise was taken for regularisation of services of DRWs/Casual Workers etc. from several departments, who were engaged on full time on or prior to 31.03.2003 and had completed 10 years of continuous service. It is reflected from the memorandum dated 18.12.2012 [Annexure R/2 to the reply] that a decision was taken by the government to regularise the services of the DRWs/casual workers, of the Department, who were engaged on or prior to 31.03.2003 on full time basis with or without concurrence of Finance Department and have completed 10 years of service as on 31.07.2012, other than Part Time Workers, Contract Basis Workers, Honorarium Paid Worker, Voluntary Workers, Teachers and Workers engaged under SSA and other Schemes/ Programmes, may be considered for this process of regularization. Thereafter the other general conditions as are available in the memorandum dated 21.01.2009 have been engrafted. This memorandum has nothing to do with the memorandum dated 21.01.2009."

[8] Eventually the petitions were disposed of by issuing following

directions:

"11. In view of the memorandum dated 21.01.2009, this court does not find any impediment in the way of regularisation of the petitioners after their completion of ten years of service. However, such regularisation would be subject to the conditions as laid down in the memorandum Page - 13 of 16

dated 21.01.2009.

12. Having observed thus, the respondents are directed to regularise the petitioners with effect from the next date on completion of ten years of service within a period of 6(six) months from today on scrutinising their individual records. But it is made clear that they shall get the regular scale with effect from the next date of completion of ten years of service in terms of the memorandum dated 21.01.2009.

With these observations and direction, all these writ petitions are allowed to the extent as indicated above."

[9] Likewise in case of Sri Ajay Kumar Acharjee Vs. The State of

Tripura & Ors. [W.P(C) No.1085 of 2016] decided by the learned Single Judge on

31.08.2017 the petitioner was engaged as a full time casual worker w.e.f.

15.11.2003. After completion of 10 years of service he had claimed the benefit of

regularization. In his case also the prayer was opposed on the ground that he was

engaged after 31.03.2003. The learned Single Judge after referring to the decision

in case of Sri Ajit Debnath (Supra) made following observations:

"6. Mr. A. Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has fairly submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the said decision in Ajit Debnath vs. State of Tripura and others. Be that as it may, this Court in Ajit Debnath vs. State of Tripura and others has laid the perspective to read the policy decision of the Government in respect of regularisation of the services of full time DRWs/Casual Worker/Contingent Worker from the next date of completion of 10 years of service on fulfilling the criteria as laid down in the said memorandum dated 21.01.2009. It has been held that no narrow interpretation of the policy would serve the purpose of regularising the DRWs/Casual Worker/Contingent Workers who have completed their 10 years of service having been engaged after 31.03.2003 with or without concurrence of the Finance Department. In the said memorandum dated 21.01.2009, it is provided that there shall be a complete ban on engagement Page - 14 of 16

of DRW/Casual/Contingent etc. workers after 31.0.03.2003 without concurrence from the Finance Department. It was cautioned that the responsibility shall be fixed on the official found responsible for any irregular engagement henceforth. Such irregular engagement shall have to be instantly terminated. Then wages, if paid, shall be recovered from the official concerned. Even after that cut off date i.e. 31.03.2003, the petitioner was engaged and his engagement was subsequently concurred by the Finance Department. Further he was allowed to continue more than 10(ten) years of service. Now the respondents cannot be allowed to hold that the petitioner will not get regularisation of his service, in terms of the said policy decision as provided in the memorandum dated 21.09.2009.

7. Having observed thus, the respondents are directed to regularise the service of the petitioner with effect from the next date of completion of 10(ten) years of service within a period of n6(six) months from today on scrutinising his individual records. But it is reiterated that the petitioner shall get the regular scale with effect from the next date of completion of 10 years of service in terms of the memorandum dated 21.01.2009. The said memorandum cannot be interpreted narrowly as sought to be done by the respondents."

[10] In case of Sri Sarbesh Sarkar Vs. The State of Tripura & Ors.

[W.P(C) No.41 of 2017] and connected petitions decided by the learned Single

Judge on 11.07.2017 once again such an issue came up for consideration. All the

petitioners were engaged on 30th June, 2003 i.e. after 31.03.2003. The learned

Single Judge referred to the decision in case of Sri Ajit Debnath (Supra) and gave

following directions:

"16. The petitioners cannot be denied the benefit of regularization as they have rendered service for more than ten years (14 years at a stretch) as the casual workers. They need security of their employment. As stated earlier, since they were/are allowed to continue for such long years, the concurrence of the Finance Department is deemed. Now the Page - 15 of 16

respondents are bound to regularize them from the date when they had completed ten years of service without break in the causal employment under their policy of regularization.

17. Having held so, the respondents are directed to regularize the petitioners with effect from the next date on completion of ten years of service within a period of six months from today on scrutinizing their individual records. But it is made clear that they would get the regular scale with effect from the date of completion of ten years of service in terms of the memorandum dated 21.01.2009."

[11] Similar issue had come up in case of Sri Dharmajit Singha Vs. The

State of Tripura & Ors. [W.P(C) No.1086 of 2016] decided on 12.07.2017

petitioner therein was engaged on 15.11.2003. His regularization was opposed on

the ground that such engagement was after 31.03.2003 the Single Judge issued

following directions:

"17. Having observed thus, this court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get the similar direction as given by this court in Ajit Debnath versus State of Tripura & Others [Judgment and order dated 23.06.2017 delivered in WP(C) No.1255/2016]. Hence, the respondents are directed to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from the next date on completion of ten years of service within a period of six months from today on scrutinizing his individual records. But it is made clear that they shall get the regular scale with effect from the next date of completion of ten years of service in terms of the memorandum dated 21.01.2009."

[12] It can thus be seen that consistently in series of cases the view taken

by the learned Single Judges that the memorandum providing that there shall be

no further engagement of casual workers after 31.03.2003 without the Page - 16 of 16

concurrence of the Finance Department, had nothing to do with the scheme of

regularization contained in OM dated 21.01.2009. These judgments have been

accepted by the Government as stated by the counsel for the petitioners.

Concerned workers have been regularized. In the present group of cases the

Government cannot rake up an old issue in which the Government has accepted

the interpretation of the Single Judge and implemented the directions issued for

regularization.

In the result all appeals are dismissed.

(S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY), J (AKIL KURESHI), CJ