Sri Biswajit Das vs The State Of Tripura
2023 Latest Caselaw 150 Tri

                               Page 1


                  HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        AGARTALA
                        W.A. 88 of 2021
Sri Biswajit Das
S/o late Prasanna Kumar Das, resident of Lowgang, P.O.
Lowgang- 799144, West RK Ganj, P.S. Santirbazaar, District-
South Tripura
                                                ... APPELLANT
                               (Petitioner in the writ petition)
          Versus
1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary,
Department of Home, Government of Tripura, New Secretariat
Building, Capital Complex, P.O. Kunjaban - 799006, P.S. NCC,
District- West Tripura
2. The District Magistrate & Collector,
South Tripura, Belonia
3. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (DWS),
Government of Tripura, Agartala, West Tripura
4. The Block Development Officer, Bokafa RD Block,
Santirbazaar, South Tripura
5. The Executive Engineer, DWS Department, Belonia,
South Tripura
6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Public Health Department
(PHE), Santirbazaar, South Tripura
7. The Superintendent of Police, South Tripura, Belonia
8. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Santirbazaar, South
Tripura
9. The Officer-in-Charge, Santirbazaar Police Station, South
Tripura
10. Lowgang Gram Panchayat, represented by the Pradhan,
Bokafa RD Block, Santirbazaar, South Tripura
11. The Panchayat Secretary, Lowgang Gram Panchayat,
Bokafa RD Block, Santirbazaar, South Tripura
12. Sri Prasenjit Paul, son of Sri Gouranga Paul, resident of
Lowgang, Rlegp Para, P.O. Lowgang-799144, P.S. Santirbazar,
District- South Tripura
                                                       ... RESPONDENTS

(Respondents in the writ petition) For Appellant(s) : Mr. B. Debnath, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, GA Mr. S. Saha, Advocate Date of hearing & delivery of judgment : 08.02.2023 Whether fit for reporting : Yes / No Page 2

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Judgment & Order (Oral) 08/02/2023 (T. Amarnath Goud, ACJ)

Heard Mr. B. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned GA assisted

by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-

State.

2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant assailing the

judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated

01.10.2020 passed in WP(C) no.311 of 2020 rejecting the prayer

of the petitioner for release of the salary of the petitioner from

the date of his retrenchment.

3. Briefly stated, the appellant-petitioner was working as

Pump Operator of Lowgang Gram Panchayat since 09.10.2005.

On 04.03.2018, the respondent no. 12 assaulted the petitioner

and forcibly snatched the keys of the pump house and ousted

him from his service and thereafter the respondent no. 12

started to discharge the duties of Pump Operator of Lowgang

Gram Panchayat. The petitioner submitted several

representations, but his representations had not been addressed

as yet. It is the further case of the petitioner that he had

submitted his work report for the period he performed as Pump

Operator before respondents no. 10 and 11 but, the respondents Page 3

no. 10 and 11 denied to countersign his work report denying his

salary. Subsequently, the petitioner had filed a writ petition and

the learned single Judge by its judgment dated 01.10.2020

though had restored the status of the petitioner as Pump

Operator but did not pass any direction for past wages.

4. Mr. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

has submitted that since 09.10.2005 the petitioner had served as

Pump Operator under the Lowgang Gram Panchayat till he was

forcibly ousted from his service by respondent no. 12 on

04.03.2018. Learned counsel has further submitted that the

petitioner has also submitted FIR against the respondent no. 12

which the respondents had admitted. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has urged to pay the back wages, the petitioner is

entitled to from the date of his retrenchment.

5. Learned GA has submitted the judgment dated 01.10.2020

passed by the learned single Judge requires no interference.

6. We have perused the records and also the judgment of the

learned single Judge.

7. From the record, it is clear that the entire affairs have been

dealt with the Block Development Officer, the respondent no. 4

herein. It is also evident that the petitioner had been serving as

Pump Operator under Lowgang Gram Panchayat and

subsequently, the petitioner has raised his grievances before the Page 4

concerned authorities but he did not get any positive response

from their end.

8. However, this court is of the opinion that the Block

Development Officer, respondent no. 4 herein, in consultation

with the Gram Panchayat shall examine the matter of the

petitioner and resolve the same with regard to the payment of

any back wages, if the petitioner is entitled to. The entire

exercise shall be completed within 3 (three) months from the

date of passing of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to file

appropriate representation before the Block Development Officer,

respondent no. 4 herein, with supporting document/ evidence, if

any in support of his claim, and the said representation, if so

filed, shall be disposed of by the Block Development Officer

within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of

the representation by a speaking order with regard to

entitlement of back wages of the petitioners. Accordingly, the

order dated 01.10.2020 passed by the learned single Judge is

interfered with as indicated above.

9. The writ appeal stands disposed of. Interim application(s), if

any, also stand disposed of.

               JUDGE                           CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)



Saikat