Tripura High Court
Sri Mithun Deb vs The State Of Tripura And Ors on 22 August, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.980 OF 2022
Sri Mithun Deb
...... Petitioner(s)
Vs.
The State of Tripura and ors.
...... Respondent (s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate.
Mr. S. Dey, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, G.A.
Mr. Soumyadeep Saha, Advocate.
Date of hearing and delivery of
Judgment & Order : 22.08.2023.
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 seeking the following reliefs:-
"i. Issue notice upon the respondents.
ii. Call for the records.
iii. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to Show
Cause as to why the petitioner shall not be granted the benefit of MACP-I
from the pay of completion of 10 years of continuous and satisfactory
service counting w.e.f. 26.08.2010 along with all arrears of financial
service.
AND
Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause
as to why the petitioner shall not be granted the benefit of two annual
increments of the year 2016 & 2017 which were illegally deducted from
the date of the petitioner at the time of pay fixation of the petitioner after
Sangita Reang's Judgment.
AND
iv. And after hearing the parties be pleased to make the
Rule absolute.
AND/OR.
Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper."
2. Heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel assisted by Mr. S.
Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D.
Bhattacharjee, learned G.A. assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents.
3. Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner has prayed for granting of MACP benefit to the petitioner from
the date of completion of 10 years of service counting w.e.f. 26.08.2010
along with all arrears of financial benefit. The learned counsel further
prayed for a direction to grant the petitioner 2(two) annual increments
of the year 2016 and 2017 which was deducted from the petitioner at
the time of pay fixation after the Judgment dated 29.01.2020 passed
by this Court in WP(C) No.295 of 2019 and other batch of matters
titled as Sangita Reang and others versus State of Tripura and
ors.
4. Heard both sides and perused the evidence on record.
5. This present writ petition is disposed of with a direction
upon the petitioner to file his respective representation and claim
highlighting his entitlement under the Rules claiming his status under
the MACP-I. On receipt of such representation, the respondents shall
consider the same in accordance with law and examine whether the
petitioner has completed the 10(ten) years of service as contemplated
under the Rules. It is needless to observe that if there is no ambiguity in
the Rules, the said decision can be taken without reference to the
decision of this Court passed in Sangita Reang(supra) and another
decision of this Court dated 25.03.2022 passed in WP(C) No.171 of
2022 titled as Sri Souradip Saha and 17 ors. Vs. The State of
Tripura and 3 ors. The respondents shall apply their minds
independently and accordingly take a decision within a period of 2(two)
months from the date of receipt of such representation from the
petitioner. The said decision be communicated to the petitioner by the
respondents.
In the event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any decision,
it amounts to a fresh cause of action and the petitioner is at liberty to
avail remedies under the law. Accordingly, the impugned memorandum
dated 24.12.2021 which is under challenge is set aside and the matter is
remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration in the light of
the representation made by the petitioner.
6. With the above observation and directions, 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
RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by
RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT
SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2023.08.25
SINGHA 13:51:11 +05'30'
