Tripura High Court
Kalidas Shil And 360 Others vs State Of Tripura And 7 Others on 16 May, 2023
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 292/2023
Kalidas Shil and 360 others ................... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Tripura and 7 others ............... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. Koomar Chakraborty, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
Date of hearing and
delivery of judgment
and order : 16.05.2023.
Whether fit for reporting : No
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment & Order (Oral)
This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
filed by the petitioners.
[2] The brief case of the petitioners is that in the year 2001, the
petitioners were appointed to the post of Riflemen (GD), TSR. On
20.07.2018, pay anomaly arose between the petitioners and one Sri
Dipak Mallik, Rifleman (GD), TSR, who is junior to them. On
20.09.2019, the petitioner submitted representation indicating such
pay anomaly, and prayed for stepping up of his pay. Similarly, the
other petitioners also submitted representations. By a Letter dated
14.10.2019, the Assistant Inspector General of Police requested the
Home Department to give instruction for removing such pay anomaly.
Thereafter, vide letters dated 03.02.2020, 23.11.2020, 15.03.2022,
the Assistant Inspector General of Police made further communications
to the Home Department to give instruction for removing such pay
anomaly. On 30.04.2022, the Deputy Secretary, Home Department
made a communication to the Deputy Secretary, Finance Department,
intimating that the said matter was referred to the Finance
Department on 08.12.2020, but no reply was received in connection
therewith. On 02.12.2022, the Deputy Secretary, Home Department
communicated the views of the Finance Department in the said regard
to the effect that the matter falls within the ambit of Government
policy decision. As and when the Government decides on such matters,
it will be communicated. According to the petitioners, in the instant
case, the petitioners are praying for stepping up of pay at par with
their juniors, which is not a matter of policy decision, rather, the
constitutional right of the petitioners.
[3] Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this court for
the following reliefs:
(i) 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, shall not be issued, mandating/directing them to
revoke/rescind the impugned letter dated 02.12.2022.
(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, shall not be issued, mandating/directing them to fix the
respective Basic Pays of the petitioners, at par with Sri Dipak Mallik,
Rifleman (GD), TSR (the private respondent) by way of stepping up
from Rs.30,230/- to Rs.31,140/-, with effect from the date when the
relevant pay anomaly arose (i.e., w.e.f. 20.07.2018), including all
the consequential benefits flowing therefrom, alongwith arrears
thereof.
[4] Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel appearing
alongwith Mr. Koomar Chakarborty, learned counsel for the
petitioners. Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. is present for the
respondents.
[5] Mr. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel submits that the
decision regarding stepping up of pay for the petitioners at par with
their juniors may be taken by the official respondents in terms of
Annexure-8 & 9 to the writ petition [communications dated
23.11.2020 and 15.3.2022 respectively from the Asstt. Inspector
General of Police (Welfare), Agartala to the Home Department,
Government of Tripura, Agartala].
[6] In view of the said submission, without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case, this present writ petition is disposed of
directing the respondents to take decision in the light of the
correspondence made by the official respondents in terms of
Annexure-8 & 9 to the writ petition as expeditiously as possible
preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the
copy of this order. It is needless to observe that the said decision shall
be taken without placing any reliance on the communication dated
02.12.2022 (Annexure- 11 to the writ petition). The petitioners are at
liberty to provide all the relevant materials to the respondents, if so
advised.
[7] With the above observation and direction, this present writ
petition stands disposed of. As a sequel, stay if any sands vacated.
pending application(s), if any also stands closed.
JUDGE
Sabyasachi G.
