Smt. Sabita Reang vs The State Of Tripura
2023 Latest Caselaw 763 Tri

                                Page 1 of 2



                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                           AGARTALA

                          WP(C) No.04 of 2023

Smt. Sabita Reang
W/O Sri Debabrata Reang, R/O- Shatrughna Para, PO&PS- Ganganagar,
Ambassa, District-Dhalai, Tripura, Age-45.
                                                 ....Petitioner(s)
                  Versus

1. The State of Tripura
   to be represented by the Secretary, Department of Finance,
   Govt. of Tripura, New Secretariat Building,
   New Capital Complex, Kunjaban,
   P.S- New Capital Compplex, Agartala,
   West Tripura, Pin-799010.
2. The Director
   Directorate of Secondary Education, Govt. of Tripura
3. The Headmaster
   Ganganagar High School, Ambassa Dhalai, Tripura
                                                      ....Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Saha, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 12/09/2023

Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State.

This is a petition for regularization of the service of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined in service as DRW in the year 1999 and since after his joining as DRW, he has been serving in the said post.

The petitioner has relied upon certain schemes introduced by the Government of Tripura for regularization of the services of DRWs/PTWs/Casual/ Contingent workers, etc, which have already been repealed under order dated 31.07.2018 issued by the State.

I have considered the submission of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

After perusal of the documents enclosed in the writ petition, I find that the petitioner has failed to justify that he had been appointed against a regular sanctioned vacant post. Even the petitioner has not produced any

document to show that he was appointed by the competent authority of the respondents. Simply, he has been appointed by an officer of the department. There is no evidence that the petitioner had possessed the requisite qualifications for holding any post as Group-D. The petitioner had joined in service in the year 1999. Moreso, the petitioner had been appointed illegally without following the procedure prevalent at that time. So, he must approach the court with the realm of the scheme and within the existence of the scheme. The delayed approach and lackadaisical attitude of the petitioner would not entail him to get the benefit of a repealed scheme. After 24 years, suddenly he woke up from the slumber. In the opinion of this Court, the petition is absolutely barred by delay and latches. Moreso, the nature of appointment of the petitioner is not irregular, but, illegal one.

This Court in WP(C) No.5 of 2023 titled as Sri Satya Ranjan Dey and Anr. Vs. The State of Tripura and 4 Ors. decided on 06.09.2023 had passed a detailed order referring many judgments of the Supreme Court and held that the petitioners of that writ petition were not entitled to get their services regularized and dismissed the writ petition.

Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same stands dismissed.

JUDGE

SAIKA Digitally signed by SAIKAT KAR

T KAR Date: 2023.09.13 15:15:26 +05'30'

Rohit