Tripura High Court
Present vs For The on 6 December, 2022
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WA NO.309 OF 2021
The State of Tripura and ors.
Vs.
Sri Priyotosh Das and ors.
Present:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, G.A.
Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A.
Mr. P. Saha, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Bhowmik, Advocate.
Mr. S. Dey, Advocate.
WA NO.68 OF 2022
The State of Tripura
Vs.
Smt. Rumela Datta Sarkar and anr.
Present:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate.
Mr. S. Dey, Advocate.
WA NO.64 OF 2022
The State of Tripura and ors.
Vs.
Sri Sanjan Das.
Present:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, G.A.
Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A.
Mr. S. Saha, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Bhowmik, Advocate.
Mr. S. Dey, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY
06.12.2022
Order
Chief Justice(Acting)
These present writ appeals are heard and taken up
together for disposal since similar question of law and facts are
involved. For the sake of convenience, W.A No.309 of 2022 is
taken up as the lead case.
The facts of the case, in brief, is that the respondents
by filing a writ petition approached the Single Bench of this Court
under Section 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of
Mandamus directing the appellant-respondents to grant one
increment in favour of the petitioner-respondents herein for the
B.Ed, training undergone by the petitioner-respondents prior to
the entry into the service as per Rule 13(1)(ii) of the Tripura
State Civil Services (Revised pay) Rules, 2009. The petitioner-
respondents further sought a writ of Certiorari for setting aside
the memorandum dated 6th July 2011 issued by the Finance
Department, Government of Tripura whereby a decision has been
taken to provide lump sump benefit as training incentive in lieu
of increment as provided under Rule 13(1)(ii) of the Tripura
State Civil Services(Revised Pay) Rules, 2009. Vide order dated
23.09.2021, the learned Single Judge allowed the said Writ
Petition No.459 of 2021. The operative portion of the said order
dated 23.08.2021 is reproduced herein-under:-
"Accordingly, the State-respondents are directed to pay
one increment w.e.f. the dates when they received the regular
pay scales in terms of the ROP rules. It is made clear that such
fixation of pay shall be notional. The petitioners shall be entitled
to get arrears of salary w.e.f. the date of filing of the present
writ petition i.e from 08.07.2021. It is further directed that the
respondents shall implement the order of this Court within a
period of 2(two) months from the date the petitioners shall
furnish a copy of this order to the concerned respondents."
Hence this instant appeal.
Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned G.A. assisted by Mr. S. Saha,
learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that
learned Single Judge should not have allowed the writ petition on
merits. The learned Single Judge misinterpreted the rule because
in the present case, though the petitioner-respondents acquired
B.Ed., degree before their entry into service, but, till the cut-of-
date i.e. 01.01.2009 they were not regular employees. The Rule-
13(1)(v) is applicable only for those who have completed training
on or after 01.01.2009 but in the present case, the requisite
qualification was obtained much earlier though they were not on
regular pay scale as per provision of Rule-2(d) of ROP, 2017.
Stating thus learned G.A. prayed to allow this appeal.
Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dey,
learned counsel submitted that the judgment and order as
passed on 19.03.2021 is just and proper and needs no
interference.
We have heard both sides and perused the judgment and
order of the learned Single Judge passed in WP(C) No.459 of
2021. In the impugned writ petition, the learned Single Judge
has dealt with all the issues and this Court finds that the order of
the learned Single Judge needs no interference.
Accordingly, this instant Writ Appeal is dismissed. The
judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)
No.459 of 2021 is upheld. Consequently, in pursuance of the
order passed in this writ appeal, the other writ appeals also
stands dismissed.
In the sequel, pending application(s), if any, also stands
closed.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
suhanjit
