Sri Amitava Chowdhury vs Tripura University (A Central ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 856 Tri

                                                      Page 1 of 6



                 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                       AGARTALA
                   WP(C) NO.501 OF 2021

1. Sri Amitava Chowdhury, Age-44
S/o: Lt. Ashok Kumar Chowdhury
R/o: Joynagar Middle Road,
Opposite to Road No.5, P.O. Agartala,
P.S. West Agartala, Dist:- West Tripura, PIN-799001.

2. Sri Pradip Kumar Roy, Age-45
S/o: Lt. Kshitish Ch. Roy,
R/o: Bagmara, Ramkrishnapalli,
P.S. Amtali, Dist: West Tripura.

                                           ----Petitioners
                          Versus

1. Tripura University (A Central University)
Established by Tripura University Act, 2006, being
represented by the Registrar, Tripura University,
Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

2. The Registrar
Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura,
PIN-799022.

3. The Vice Chancellor
Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura,
PIN-799022.

4. The Director,
Directorate of Distance Education, Tripura University,
Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

                                    ---- Respondents.

WP(C) NO.502 OF 2021

Sri Uttam Biswas, S/o: Lt. Sarbanada Biswas Vill: Amtali Ballavpur, Near Tripura University P.O. & P.S: Amtali, Dist: West Tripura, PIN: 799130

----Petitioner Versus

1. Tripura University (A Central University) Established by Tripura University Act, 2006, being represented by the Registrar, Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

2. The Registrar Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

3. The Vice Chancellor Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

4. The Director, Directorate of Distance Education, Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

---- Respondents.

WP(C) NO.503 OF 2021

Sri Sukanta Choudhury S/o: Lt. Arunmoy Choudhury R/o: Vill: Kalinagar, P.O. Belonia, Dist: South Tripura, PIN: 799155

----Petitioner Versus

1. Tripura University (A Central University) Established by Tripura University Act, 2006, being represented by the Registrar, Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

2. The Registrar Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

3. The Vice Chancellor

Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

---- Respondents.

WP(C) NO.504 OF 2021

Sri Tanmay Bhowmik, Age-35 years S/o: Nayan Ranjan Bhowmik, R/o: S.D. Mission, P.S. A.D. Nagar, Dist: West Tripura, PIN:799003.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Tripura University (A Central University) Established by Tripura University Act, 2006, being represented by the Registrar, Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

2. The Registrar Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

3. The Vice Chancellor Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, District-West Tripura, PIN-799022.

---- Respondents.

For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, Advocate.

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 07.09.2021

Whether fit for reporting : NO.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)

Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioners as well as Mr. Raju Datta, learned counsel

appearing for the respondents- Tripura University in this batch of

writ petitions.

2. All the writ petitions have been taken up and heard

together since common questions of law and facts are involved.

3. All the petitioners of this batch of writ petitions were

engaged on contractual basis. They have been discharging their

duties till now under a specific contract. Ms. Debbarma, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that since the

petitioners have been discharging their duties for last 10 years,

the Court should pass a direction upon the respondents to frame

a policy or scheme for regularisation of the petitioners. Her

alternative submission is that the service of the petitioners

should be regularised for rendering 10 years of service on

contractual basis.

4. I have considered the submissions of Ms. Debbarma,

learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

5. Firstly, the Court has no power to direct the

Government or any statutory authority to frame any scheme or

policy for regularisation of their employees. Whether a policy or

scheme for regularisation or for any other purpose should be

made or not, it is absolutely within the domain of the

Government and as such, I am unable to agree with the

submission of the learned counsel that Court can direct the

Government or the statutory authority, like the respondents

here-in to frame particular policy or scheme for regularisation of

its employees.

6. Secondly, dealing with the submission of the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioners claiming regularisation of

the petitioners in view of their continued service for the last 10

years also cannot be entertained because contractual employees

have no right to claim such regularisation.

7. Lastly, Ms. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners claim equal

pay for equal work for the reason that they are holding

sanctioned posts under the respondents and they are at least

entitled to get the lowest pay scale in the lowest grade of Group-

C or Group-D at entry level pay scale in accordance with law, in

view of the fact that the petitioners have been discharging their

duties against the sanctioned posts. In my opinion, their claim in

this regard may be considered by the respondents.

8. However, Mr. Raju Datta, learned counsel appearing for

the respondents-Tripura University has submitted that the

petitioners are not holding the sanctioned posts, and even there

was no selection process and their engagements were made in

violation of the established norms of employment. However, I

have left this matter upon the respondents to consider the claim

of the petitioners for granting the lowest pay scale in the lowest

grade of Group-C and Group-D at entry level pay scale in

accordance with law applicable in the university, if they are

holding the sanctioned post. It is apprised to this Court by Mr.

Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-Tripura

University that recently the respondents had notified

advertisement for filling up the posts the petitioners are holding

at present and the petitioners have participated in the selection

process in response to the said advertisement.

9. With the aforesaid observations, this batch of writ

petitions stands disposed.

JUDGE

suhanjit