Tripura High Court
Mr. P.Roy Barman vs Mr. R. Datta on 5 July, 2023
Page 1 of 2
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.411 OF 2023
Sri Bikash Roy
Vs.
The State of Tripura and ors.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
Present:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
Mr. K. Nath, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R. Datta, P.P.
Mr. S. Debnath, Addl. P.P.
05.07.2023
Order
This present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-
"i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why
writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or directions of
like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to
implement the Order, dated 02.12.2021, passed by the Hon'ble High
Court in WP(C) No.617 of 2021.
ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why
writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or directions of
like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to make
payment of Rs. 12,09,046/- as gratuity to the petitioner.
iii. Issue Rule upon the respondents to show cuase as to why
writ in the nature of Mandamas and/or order/orders and/or directions of
like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to pay
interest @ 9% per annum on Rs.12,09,046/- for delay payment w.e.f.
01.09.2020 till the date of actual payment.
iv. Issue Rule upon the respondents to show cause as to why
writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or directions of
like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the respondents to
release leave encashment benefit to the petitioner with interest @9% P.A.
w.e.f. 01.09.2020, till the payment is made.
v. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why
writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or directions of
like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing the letter, dated
19.06.2023, issued by the Managing Director, THCL.
vi. Make the rules absolute.
vii. Call for records.
viiii. Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court
considered fit and proper."
Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. counsel assisted
by Mr.S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
as well as Mr. K. De, learned Addl. G.A., appearing for the
respondents.
It is seen from the record that the state government has filed
a Review Petition before this Court vide Rev.Petn No.4 of 22 for
review of the order dated 02.12.2021, passed by this Court in WP(C)
No.617 of 2021. But vide Judgment and Order(Oral) dated
24.04.2023, the said review petition was dismissed. In such
circumstances, this Court feels that the present petition is not
maintainable. However, the petitioner is at liberty to take steps
available under the law, if so advised, under the Contempt of Courts
Proceedings since the review Petition filed by the Government has
been dismissed vide order dated 24.03.2023.
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
RAJKUMAR Digitally
RAJKUMAR
signed by
SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2023.07.06
SINGHA 16:17:53 +05'30'
