Tripura High Court
Smt. Dipti Marak vs The State Of Tripura And 2 Ors on 25 January, 2024
Author: Arindam Lodh
Bench: Arindam Lodh
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.694 of 2023
Smt. Dipti Marak
....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Tripura and 2 Ors.
....Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Order
25/01/2024
By means of filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for
following reliefs:
"i) Issue notice upon the Respondents.
ii) Call for the Records.
iii) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to
why the Petitioner shall not be granted the benefit of one
increment under Rule 13(1)(v) of the TSCS (RP) Rules, 2009 along
with all arrears of financial benefit.
AND
Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why
the memorandum dated 6th July, 2011 issued by the Finance
Department, Government of Tripura shall not be set aside and
quashed.
AND
Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why
the Petitioner shall not be granted the benefit of one increment as
per the Judgment and Order at Annexure 6 and 7 of this Writ
Petition as upheld by the judgment of the Ld. Division Bench at
Annexure-8 of this Petition.
iv) And after hearing the parties, be pleased to make the rule
absolute.
AND/OR
Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper by this
Hon'ble Court."
The fact of the case is that the petitioner was appointed as a Graduate
Teacher under the respondents vide memorandum dated 14.06.2005.
Thereafter, on completion of 5 years of service the petitioner was extended
with the benefit of regular pay scale vide memorandum dated 04.08.2010. The
petitioner in the present writ petition highlighted that she had completed
Certificate Course in Teacher Education Examination (CCTE) from Tripura
University on 25.04.2008 and she completed T.Ed. after entry into service but
prior to 01.01.2009. It is the grievance of the petitioner that since she
completed her T.Ed. after entry into service but, prior to the cut-off date, she
is entitled to one advance increment under Rule 13(1)(v) of the TSCS (RP)
Rules, 2009 (for short, Rules of 2009). The memorandum dated 6th July,
2011(Annexure-5 to the writ petition) restricts the operation of Rules of 2009
and is illegal being violative of the statute and it is a settled law that
instructions/orders/memorandums cannot supplement the rules but can
supplant the rules. Vide memorandum dated 6th July, 2011, the respondents
have decided to grant lumpsum benefit which is not there in the Rules of 2009
and as such, the said memorandum dated 6th July, 2011 is illegal and requires
interference in this regard.
This Court in W.P.(C) No.602/2021 titled as Sri Sanjan Das vs. The
State of Tripura and 2 Ors. vide judgment and order dated 19.01.2022 held
that in-service Teachers who completed B.Ed. Degree after entering into
service and prior to 01.01.2009 would be entitled to one advance increment.
The said judgment was challenged in an intra-court appeal, which was
dismissed.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the
parties.
It is admitted position that the petitioner obtained T.Ed. Degree prior to
the cut-off date i.e. 01.01.2009 and as per Rules of 2009, the petitioner is
entitled to get one advance increment instead of lumpsum amount.
The instant writ petition is also covered by the decision of the learned
Court in Sanjan Das(supra).
In view of this, I direct the respondents to pay one advance increment to
the petitioner. The respondents are directed to pay one advance increment in
the light of the judgment passed in the case of Sanjan Das(supra).
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition
stands allowed and thus, disposed of.
JUDGE
Snigdha
SANJAY Digitally signed by
SANJAY GHOSH
GHOSH 15:53:50 +05'30'
Date: 2024.01.29
