Tripura High Court
Present vs . on 17 March, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.774 OF 2022
Sri Apu Das
Vs.
The Union of India and Ors.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
Present:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mrs. R. Chakraborty, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, CGC.
Mr. B. Ghosh, Advocate.
17.03.2023
Order
The petitioner has filed this instant writ petition
praying for the following reliefs:-
" i) Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of
them, to show cause as to why a Certiorari and/or in the nature
thereof, for directing the respondents, to transmit the records,
appeartaning to his writ petition, lying with them, for rendering
substantive and conscionable justice to the petitioner;
ii) Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of
them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Mandamus and/or in the
nature thereof, for mandating/directing them, to forthwith pay in
equal shares to the petitioner and the private respondent, the
service benefits, accruing upon the death of the mother of the
petitioner, and also to pay a sum of Rs.23,00,000/-, alongwith
interest at the rate of 18% as service benefits on the death of
Smt. Arati Das, with effect from 02.12.2016, alongwith all other
service benefits, accruing on the death of the mother, Smt. Arati
Das;
iii) Call for the records appertaining to his petition.
iv) Costs of and incidental to this proceeding;
v) After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the Rule
Absolute in terms of ii above.
vi) Any other Relief(s) as to this Hon'ble High Court may
deem fit and proper;"
Intra alia praying for similar reliefs, the petitioner had
earlier presented a writ petition before this Court, marked as
WP(C) No.606 of 2018, and by Judgment & Order dated
21.06.2018, the same was allowed with certain directions
which are as follows:-
"6. Taking note the material on record and the
submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, this court thinks it
appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction that the
petitioner to submit self contained representation addressed to
the concerned authorities of the Airport Authority of India along
with the copy of this order within four weeks, as prayed. The
authority may decide the representation assigning cogent reasons
within ten weeks thereafter and the decision be communicated to
the petitioner.]
7. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the communication
made by the Airport Authority he will be at liberty to avail remedy
which the law permits.
Heard Mrs. R. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Ghosh, learned counsel and
Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner on the strength of the representation
made has filed this writ petition seeking benefits. It is seen
from records that the said so-called representation which is
said to have been filed by the writ petitioner neither bears a
date, or signature nor there is any proof of acknowledgment of
service on the respondents.
In view of the same, this Court finds that the present
writ petition is erroneous. However, having regard to the
subject matter involved in this writ petition i.e. with regard to
seeking service benefits by the petitioner, an opportunity is
given to the petitioner to make a fresh representation in
accordance with the law to the respondents. On receipt of the
same, the respondents shall consider the same within a period
of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this
order.
With the above observation and direction, this instant
writ petition stands disposed of. Stay if any stands vacated,
pending application(s), if any also stands closed.
CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
suhanjit
