Tripura High Court
Mr. T.K. Deb vs Mr. K. De on 11 August, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.495 OF 2023
Swapan Chandra Acharjee
Vs.
The State of Tripura and ors.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
Present:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.K. Deb, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A.
11.08.2023
Order
This present writ petition has been filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-
"i. Issue Rule calling upon the respondents or each of one
of them to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of certiorari should not
issued quashing/setting aside the impugned letter of the Addl. Secretary,
Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affiars, Govt. of Tripura vide
No.F.2B(11)/ESTT/DF/91/7210, dated 20,05.2023(Annexure-10);
ii. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents or each one of
them to show cause as to why a Writ of Certiorari setting aside the
impugned Office Order issued by the Officer In-Charge, Central Stores, AD
Nagar, Agartala vide No.F2(2-325)-CS/ESTT/1998/1778-80, dated 6th
December, 2021(Annexure-3) and corrigendum dated 08th December,
2021(Annexure-4) should not be passed;
iii. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents or each one of them
to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing, the
respondents 2 & 3 should not be passed for not recover any amount from
the pension benefit of the petitioner on account of alleged wrong fixation of
pay w.e.f. 01.07.2001;
iv. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents or each one of them
to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing, the
respondents 2 & 3 should not be passed to immediately refund of the
amount of Rs.12,38,754/- and also Rs.10,000/- which has also been
recovered from the salary of the petitioner.
v. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents or each one of them
to shoe cause as to why the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 should not be directed
for providing admissible rate of interest of @9% over the payment of
gratuity for the delayed months of sanction on 6th August, 2022 wherein the
petitioner retired on 31.01.2022;
vi. In case the respondents shoe caused or not your Lordships
may be pleased to make the Rules absolute in terms of the prayers made in
SI. i. ii. iii. Iv & v as above.
vii. Pending disposal of this Writ petition your Lordships may be
pleased to pass an Order to the respondent authorities to release the
Provisional Gratuity with 9% interest for the delayed period of sanction order
as entitled as per Gratuity Act for the ends of justice;"
Heard Mr. T.K. Deb, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner as well as Mr. K. De, learned Addl. G.A. appearing
for the respondents-State.
Vide Order dated 09.08.2023, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner submitted that this case is covered
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgments passed in Civil
Appeal No.7115 of 2010 titled as Thomas Daniel Vrs. The
State of Kerala and C.A. No.11527 of 2014 (arising out of
SLP©No.11684 of 2012) titled as State of Punjab and ors.
Vs.Rafiq Masih(White Washer) and the same needs to be
allowed at the admission stage itself.
Thereafter, the matter was listed today at the
request of learned Addl. G.A. to ascertain the said legal
proposition.
As indicated in the earlier proceeding mentioned
here-in-above, today, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submitted that the matter is covered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court Judgments passed in Thomas Daniel(supra) and
State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih(supra).
In all fairness, learned G.A. appearing for the
State-respondents submit that the present matter is squarely
covered by Hon'ble Apex Court Judgments as represented by
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
In view of the same, the present writ petition
stands allowed and thus disposed of. As a sequel stay if any
stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any also stands closed.
JUDGE
suhanjit
RAJKUMAR Digitally
RAJKUMAR
signed by
SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2023.08.11
SINGHA 14:28:15 +05'30'
