Tripura High Court
Smt. Soma Paul And Another vs The State Of Tripura And Others on 11 May, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
WP(C) No.1108 of 2022
Smt. Soma Paul and another
...... Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
The State of Tripura and others
......Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. K. Debnath, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sharma, Addl. G.A.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
_O_ R_ D_ E_ R_
11/05/2023
Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel for the petitioners
has pointed to the operative portion of the judgment dated 31.03.2016
(Annexure-1) rendered by this Court in WP(C) No.488 of 2015 and
analogous matters in case of the same two petitioners which is extracted
hereunder :
"It is the admitted position that all the petitioners have
been languishing in the post of Senior Instructor, Group-C (Non-
Gazetted) now for about 9 years without any promotion whereas
in the similar post for the other department after five years, an
incumbent becomes eligible for consideration of promotion to the
next higher grade. This is not a fair management practice. The
fairness of action is fundamental to the state action, which the
respondents have failed to discharge so far. Hence, it is directed
that the respondents shall formulate a scheme for promotion from
the post of Senior Instructor, Group-C (Non-gazetted) for the
Science Department or for the post of Instructor, Group-C (Non-
Gazetted) for the Science Department within a period of 6 months
from today. In terms of the said scheme, the petitioners shall be
considered, if they are otherwise eligible for such consideration.
With this observation and directions, these writ petitions are
partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. There shall be no
order as to costs.
The decision was upheld in WA No.114 of 2016 judgment
dated 21.02.2017 (Annexure-2). Thereafter, a contempt proceeding was
also pursued by the petitioners which was disposed of on 21.09.2017 on
an undertaking that as soon as the restriction imposed by the Apex Court
is lifted, the case of the petitioners shall be considered within a period of
30 days. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners
have been compelled to move this Court again as their cases have not
been considered despite creation of two posts of Senior Instructor in
Group-B (Non-Gazetted) vide memo dated 25.07.2017 (Annexure-4) and
these petitioners have been promoted thereafter in Gazetted capacity vide
memo dated 04.02.2022 (Annexure-5).
The only grievance of the petitioners which remains is
whether they should be granted promotion on the posts of Senior
Instructor with retrospective effect that means within six months of the
date of the judgment. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits
that despite three adjournments counter affidavit has not been filed and in
effect the directions of this Court at the first instance are being violated.
Mr. D. Sharma, learned Additional Government Advocate
prays for further four weeks time to file counter affidavit.
Having regard to the directions passed by this Court in
WP(C) No.488 of 2015 and analogous cases and two posts of Senior
Inspector (Gazetted) have been created in compliance thereof, and the
petitioners have also been promoted thereafter. The only issue remains
regarding the claim of the petitioners for granting retrospective effect to
the promotions given to them vide Annexure-5. Therefore, four weeks
time is allowed to file the counter affidavit and make their stand clear on
this issue.
Matter be listed on 22nd June, 2023.
(APARESH KUMAR SINGH) CJ
Dipesh
