Mr. K.Nath vs Mr. D. Sarma
2022 Latest Caselaw 593 Tri

                                    Page 1 of 2




                      HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
                                WP(C) No. 498 of 2022
For Petitioner(s)      :    Mr. K.Nath, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)      :    Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. G.A.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD _O_ R_ D_ E_ R_ 27/06/2022 Heard Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondent- State.

The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

(i) Issue rule upon the respondents to show case as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to allow five non-compounded advance increments to the petitioner for having Ph.D Degree at the entry level in terms of the Para-4(i) of the Annexure-1 of the Notification, dated 02.02.2010, issued by the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Tripura, Education (Higher) Department.

(ii) Make rule absolute.

(iii) Call for the records."

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is serving as Assistant Professor under the respondents has sought for necessary order directing the respondents to grant her five non-compounded advance increments for having Ph.D Degree at the entry level. As per the Notification, dated 02.02.2010, the petitioner became entitled to five non-compounded advance increments for having Ph. D degree at the entry level. The petitioner is squarely covered by the Para-4(i) of the Annexure I of the Notification dated 02.02.2010 till date the petitioner has not been given the benefit of five non- compounded advance increments for having Ph. D degree at the entry level.

The case of the petitioner is that in pursuance of the educational qualifications, the petitioner is entitled for certain additional emoluments. The petitioner has placed reliance on the notification dated 02.02.2010 and also the judgment passed in WP(C) No.880 of 2019 dated 13.09.2019 and further

addressed a representation before the concerned respondent on 26.06.2021 through proper channel. But, in turn, the Principal of the institution having acknowledged the same has also recommended the matter. Though one year has elapsed, there is no response from the respondents.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the present petition stands disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petition within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

JUDGE

A. Ghosh