Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sri Jayanta Debbarma vs The State Of Tripura And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 8 Tri

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8 Tri
Judgement Date : 11 January, 2024

Tripura High Court

Sri Jayanta Debbarma vs The State Of Tripura And Ors on 11 January, 2024

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                                        Page 1 of 3




                          HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                AGARTALA
                           WP(C) NO.382 OF 2022

      Sri Jayanta Debbarma
                                                            ............... Petitioner
                         Vs.

      The State of Tripura and ors.
                                                      ............... Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.

Mr. Koomar Chakraborty, Advocate.

Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sharma, Addl. G.A.

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 11.01.2024

Whether fit for reporting : NO.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD

JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)

This present writ petition has been filed under Article 226

of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

"i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing and cancelling the Memorandum dated 07.01.2022 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Tripura(Disciplinary Authority) GA(AR) Department.

ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued, whereby quashing and cancelling the Order dated 29.03.2022, issued by the Chief Secretary, Appellate Authority, GA(AR) Dept. iii. Make the Rules absolute.

iv. Cal for records.

Pass any further order/orders as the Hon'ble High Court considered fit and proper."

2. Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. counsel assisted by

Mr. Koomar Chakraborty, learned counsel, and Ms. A. Debbarma,

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sharma,

learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State-respondents.

3. Mr. Roy Barman, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that the Appellate Authority passed a long order but

without application of mind. The Appellate Authority has not applied its

independent mind and has only observed that the points raised by the

appellant has been examined by the Government in the GA(AR)

Department and no new points has been found. The Appellate Authority

failed to consider the appeal in terms of the mandate of Rule 27 of the

CCS(CCA) Rule, 1965.

4. On the other hand, Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A.,

appearing for the State-respondents agrees that the impugned order

passed by the respondent-Appellate Authority is unreasoned.

5. Heard and perused the evidence on record.

6. It is seen from the record that in the impugned order 29 th

March, 2022, the respondent-Appellate Authority has only stated that "

the above points raised by the appellant has examined in the GA(AR)

Department and no new points has been found to consider the appeal

and to interfere with the order dated 07.01.2022 of the Disciplinary

Authority". It is evident that the same has been passed without the

application of an independent mind by the Appellate Authority. He has

only relied upon the findings of the order of the Disciplinary Authority

dated 07.01.2022. However, in all fairness, both the parties have

pointed out that the impugned order passed by the respondent-

Appellate Authority is an unreasoned order and accordingly, the same

needs to be set aside and the matter needs to be remanded back.

7. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the

respondent-Appellate Authority is set aside and the matter is remanded

back to the respondent-Appellate Authority i.e. Chief Secretary. GA(AR)

Department, Government of Tripura for adjudication of the same in

accordance with law after giving a fresh opportunity to the petitioner.

The said exercise shall be completed preferably within a period of

3(three) months from the date of receipt of this order by the

respondents. However, it is needless to observe that the petitioner

would cooperate with the said proceeding.

8. With the above observation and direction, this present writ

petition stands disposed of. Stay if any stands vacated. Pending

application(s), if any also stands closed.

JUDGE

suhanjit

RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2024.01.12 SINGHA 16:40:29 +05'30'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter