Shri Manik Lal Majumder vs The State Of Tripura And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 414 Tri

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 414 Tri
Judgement Date : 25 March, 2021

Tripura High Court

Shri Manik Lal Majumder vs The State Of Tripura And Others on 25 March, 2021

                                  Page 1 of 3



                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                       _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
                              WP(C) No.106 of 2021
Shri Manik Lal Majumder
                                                       ......Petitioner(s)
                                  VERSUS
The State of Tripura and others
                                                         ......Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s)         :       Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate,
                                  Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)         :       Mr. Bidyut Majumder, Asst. S.G.,
                                  Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.

      HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
                                  ORDER

25.03.2021

This order that I propose to pass, is after detailed deliberations

with advocates for both sides and perhaps the only appropriate order that

could be passed under the circumstances of the case. In that view of the

matter, it is not necessary to record long and complicated facts of the past.

Suffice it to note that the petitioner was a Government servant. He crossed

the age of superannuation on 30th June, 2014. However, at that time on

account of his conviction in a criminal case, he was dismissed from service.

He successfully challenged his conviction before the High Court when the

High Court allowed his appeal and set aside his conviction and sentence by

a judgment dated 2nd May, 2019. The department thereupon passed an

order on 20th June, 2020 and recalled the order of dismissal of the petitioner

dated 25th June, 2013. The Government, however, decided to proceed

departmentally against the petitioner despite his acquittal by the High

Court. At that stage the petitioner has filed this petition mainly raising the

grievance that finalization of his post retiral benefits has taken an unduly

long time and the same would be further delayed on account of the inquiry

that the Government has now instituted. The counsel for the petitioner had

raised the grievance that despite recall of the order of dismissal the

petitioner was not paid provisional pension.

In background of such facts, I am of the opinion that the

petitioner must receive his provisional pension from the date of his

retirement till the disciplinary authority takes final decision on the

departmental inquiry against him. Further, considering the facts of the case

such departmental proceedings must be completed expeditiously. The

incident in relation to which the departmental inquiry is instituted is an old

one. It may be that considerable time was consumed in pursuing the

criminal case against the petitioner. However, having crossed the age of

superannuation in June, 2014, the petitioner has a right to be informed

about the outcome of the inquiry against him.

Under the circumstances, the petition is disposed of with

following directions :

(i) The respondents shall issue a formal order releasing the

provisional pension of the petitioner within one month from

today. Such provisional pension with arrears from the date of

superannuation till date shall be paid over to the petitioner

within a month thereafter.

(ii) If there are any other post retiral benefits which the

petitioner can claim under the Service Rules despite pendency

of the departmental inquiry, the same may also be released.