Tripura High Court
Bibhu Debi Debbarma And Anr vs The State Of Tripura And Ors on 25 April, 2023
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.608 OF 2022
Bibhu Debi Debbarma and anr.
......... Appellant(s)
Vs.
The State of Tripura and ors.
.......Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, G.A.
Mr. Soumyadeep Saha, Advocate.
Date of hearing and delivery of
Judgment & Order : 25.04.2023.
Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO.
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)
This present writ petition has been filed under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for necessary
directions upon the respondents to give the petitioners, the
benefit of the Old Pension Scheme along with all relevant
incidental and ancillary benefits flowing therefrom. The
petitioners are seeking directions from the respondents, to the
effect, that the petitioners are covered by the Old Pension
Scheme, in view of the fact, that, the advertisement, followed
by the selection process for the post of Post Graduate Teacher
was completed before 01.07.2018. The offers of appointment
were issued to the petitioners before 01.07.2018. The
petitioners herein are also seeking for necessary directions for
quashing and canceling the memorandum, dated 21.06.2022,
issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Government of
Tripura. Hence the writ petitioners herein have filed this present
writ petition seeking the following reliefs:-
" i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause
as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order(s) and/or
direction(s) of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing and
cancelling the Memo, dated 21.06.2022, issued by the Director of
Secondary Education, Government of Tripura.
ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as
to why a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or order(s) and/or
direction(s) of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing that
the petitioners are covered by the Old Pension Scheme, in view of the
fact, that the advertisement, followed by selection process for the post
of Post Gradutate Teacher was completed before 01.07.2018, and the
offers of appointment were issued to the petitioners before
01.07.2018, and their joining happened after 01.07.2018 due to the
failure of the respondents to act promptly.
iii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as
to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order(s) and/or
direction(s) of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the
respondents to give the petitioners, the benefit of the Old Pension
Scheme along with all relevant incidental and ancillary benefits flowing
therefrom.
iv. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as
to why a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or order(s) and/or
direction(s) of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the
respondents to treat the petitioners under General Provident Fund, and
to open GPF account in favour of each of the petitioners.
AND
Call for the records pertaining to the instant writ
petition from the custody of the respondents and to make the rule
absolute.
AND
After hearing both the parties pass any order/orders
as this Hon'ble High Court considers fit and proper."
2. Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. counsel
assisted by Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners as well as Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned G.A.
assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents.
3. Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. counsel appearing
for the petitioners submits that his clients submitted identical
representations seeking benefits of the Old Pension Scheme. But
without application of mind, the Director of the Secondary
Education, Government of Tripura, vide memo dated 21.06.2022
informed the petitioners that they are not entitled to get the
benefits of the Old Pensions Scheme as they had joined their
service on or after 01.07.2018. The respondents more
particularly, the Director of Secondary Education, Government
of Tripura did not consider the ground taken by the petitioners
in their representation. No reason has been assigned as to why
the contention made by the petitioners cannot be accepted. It
has also not been clarified, as to how the petitioners can be
deprived of the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme in view of the
Order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Learned Sr. counsel
further submits that the respondents have acted arbitrarily upon
the petitioners and the action of the respondents is most unfair
and arbitrary.
4. Heard both sides and perused the evidence on
record. This present writ petition is disposed of with a direction
upon the petitioners herein to file separate representations
making their respective claims before the respondents and also
enclose any other materials in addition to the earlier
representation filed if so advised. On the receipt of the same,
the respondents shall pass a separate speaking order in respect
of the separate representation filed by each petitioner and the
same shall be communicated to them. This exercise shall be
completed within a period of 3(three) months from the date of
receipt of such representation from the petitioners.
5. With the above observation and direction, this
present writ petition stands disposed of. As a sequel, stay if any
stands vacated, pending application(s), if any also stands
closed.
JUDGE
suhanjit
