Sri Swapan Kumar Shill vs The State Of Tripura And 3 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1001 Tri

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1001 Tri
Judgement Date : 30 November, 2022

Tripura High Court

Sri Swapan Kumar Shill vs The State Of Tripura And 3 Ors on 30 November, 2022

                               Page 1 of 2



                  HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        AGARTALA

                     WP(C) No. 1035 of 2022

Sri Swapan Kumar Shill
                                                               ...Petitioner
                          Vs

The State of Tripura and 3 Ors.
                                                            ...Respondents

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Nath, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharya, GA Mr. P. Saha, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 30/11/2022 By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has claimed for regularization of his service in view of the memorandum dated 12th August, 2014 issued by the Government in the Finance Department.

Heard Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned GA assisted by Mr. P. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State.

It is submitted by Mr. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was first engaged as a Casual Worker under the respondents in the year 1992 and till then, he has been rendering his services with sincerity and devotion to his duties.

At this juncture, Mr. Bhattacharya, learned GA has submitted that after the judgment passed in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, the State Government had formulated certain schemes to regularize the irregularly appointed employees and that process was continued

till the year 2018, and at present, there is no such scheme for regularization.

It is settled law that claiming regularization in service is not a matter of right. It is a right to be considered by the State authorities.

In view of this, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition as it is absolutely barred by the doctrine of delay and laches.

Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Snigdha