Tripura High Court
Sri Sukanta Chanda vs The State Of Tripura on 27 August, 2024
Author: Arindam Lodh
Bench: Arindam Lodh
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 800 OF 2022
Sri Sukanta Chanda, s/o Sri Sudhangshu Chanda, r/o
Vill-Subhas Nagar, P.O. +P.S. Kanchanpur, District-North Tripura,
Pin-799270, Aged about-34 years.
......Petitioner.
Vs.
1. The State of Tripura, represented by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Govt. of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New
Capital Complex, District-West Tripura, Pin-799006.
2. The Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New
Capital Complex, District-West Tripura, Pin-799006.
3. The District Magistrate and Collector, North Tripura, Dharmanagar,
P.O. + P.S. Dharmanagar, District-North Tripura, Pin-799250.
4. The Sub-divisional Magistrate, Kanchanpur, P.O. + P.S. Kanchanpur,
District- North Tripura, Pin-799270.
5. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Tripura, P.O.
+ P.S. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, Distrct-West Tripura, Pin-
799006.
..... Respondents.
For the petitioner : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, G.A.
Date of hearing and 27.08.2024.
date of delivery of :
judgment & Order
Whether fit for
reporting : Yes/No
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Judgment & Order (Oral)
By means of filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has
prayed for the minimum pay scale relevant to the post of Cook under the State
Govt. on the principle of equal pay for equal work.
2. I have heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, learned G.A. appearing
for the State-respondents.
Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned G.A. has submitted that the State-
respondents have submitted their counter affidavit through Online and the
hard copy would be filed today.
3. From the records particularly Annexure-1 to the writ petition it
comes to light that the petitioner was engaged as 'Voucher Payee' worker to
work at Kanchanpur Revenue Dak Bungalow as a Cook in the year 2006 and
it is submitted that in the year 2009, he was considered as a contingent worker.
Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further
submitted that the remuneration of the contingent worker has been increased
in the meantime by the Government of Tripura by circular dated 27 th
December, 2022 [Annexure-10 to the writ petition]. Learned counsel has
reiterated that the petitioner has submitted representation on 25.07.2022
[Annexure-4 to the writ petition] to the concerned authority to pay him the
increased remuneration, but the same was not considered by the respondents.
4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel appearing
for the parties. I am afraid as to how a 'Voucher Payee' employee can invite
the discretionary and extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court vested upon it
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? In my opinion, the petitioner
does not hold any civil post. As such he has no locus to ask this Court to
exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
6. However, in the light of foregoing discussions, out of sympathy, I
direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner within a
period six weeks' from today and communicate the same to the petitioner
within two weeks thereafter.
JUDGE
SANJAY GHOSH Digitally signed by SANJAY GHOSH
Date: 2024.08.28 16:30:23 +05'30'
sanjay
