Tripura High Court
Shri Debabrata Palit vs The State Of Tripura And 2 Ors on 20 January, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No. 649 of 2022
Shri Debabrata Palit
...Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State of Tripura and 2 Ors.
...Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Biswas, Sr. Advocate
Mr. K. Roy, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Dey, Advocate General
Mr. K. De, Addl. GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Order
20/01/2023
Heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned senior counsel assisted by
Mr. K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also
heard Mr. S.S. Dey, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. K.
De, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents-State.
This is a second round of litigation. In earlier round of
litigation this Court had disposed of the writ petition being WP(C)
No.860 of 2017 titled as Sri Debabrata Palit vs. The State of
Tripura and 2 Ors with the following directions:
"12. This court is shocked to observe that how an officer can be
allowed to continue in the deputation post for long 23 (twenty
three) years. It cannot be believed that without the knowledge of
the parent department he was appointed as the Assistant Project
Director (APD) on promotion with higher pay scale. Hence, the
knowledge is deemed. In such circumstances, the parent
department owes an obligation to protect the pay by releasing the
additional increments notionally or by releasing the Grade pay.
The parent department shall take the appropriate action after the
Finance Department examined the matter on reference and
having due regard to the observation made above. It is to be
noted that the Finance Department shall take into consideration,
the exceptional circumstances which has all ended the context
and review their earlier decision."
Mr. Biswas, learned senior counsel has submitted that after
receipt of the judgment, the Government has decided that the basic
pay of the petitioner would be at Rs.81,700/-. The learned senior
counsel has also submitted that while calculating this amount, the
respondents had not considered the information determining the
basic pay structure of the petitioner by the District Magistrate &
Collector, North Tripura District, Dharmanagar wherein certain
calculations have been made and it was projected that the basic pay
of the petitioner as on 01.07.2019 would be Rs.84,600/- [Level 12,
Cell-24].
It is apparent that the respondents while considering the
correspondence dated 4th July, 2020 did not indicate anything about
any wrong in the calculation made by the District Magistrate &
Collector, North Tripura. The respondents also did not satisfy as to
why this calculation as indicated in the letter dated 4th July, 2020
by District Magistrate & Collector, North Tripura would not be
provided to the petitioner. Furthermore, the State-authorities i.e. the
respondents while considering the fixation of pay of the petitioner
ought to have kept in mind the direction of this Court that the
parent department owes an obligation to protect the pay by
releasing the additional increments notionally or by releasing the
Grade Pay.
Learned Advocate General appearing for the State-
respondents has submitted that a direction may be passed upon the
respondents to relook into the matter and pass a fresh direction in
the line of the observations made by this Court here-in-above and
also the computation made by the District Magistrate & Collector
vide correspondence made dated 4th July, 2020.
The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 1
(one) month from today.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant
writ petition stands allowed and thus disposed of.
JUDGE
Snigdha
