Tripura High Court
Shri Suman Dey vs The State Of Tripura And 2 Others on 4 March, 2024
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) 177 of 2024
Shri Suman Dey
---Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Tripura and 2 Others.
---Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.S. Sinha, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mrs. R. Chakraborty, Advocate.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
ORDER
04.03.2024
This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Admit this petition;
(ii) Call for the records.
(iii) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to
why the disciplinary proceedings as well as charges leveled against the petitioner vide
Memorandum dated 17-03-2021 should not be set aside and quashed.
(iv) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to
why the frequent change of Inquiring Authority without valid ground should not be
considered as a big factor to get the proceedings completed early and it is a factor for
putting the petitioner under pressure is caused the delaying proceeding would make
him deprived of from early regularized in the post of permanent laborer.
(v) Issue writ in the nature mandamus directing the respondent authorities to provide the
subsistence allowance which the petitioner is entitled to during the period of
suspension from 27-10-2020 to 26- 02-2021.
(vi) Pass any other order/orders which your Lordship deem fit and proper.
It is the case of the petitioner he is a permanent labour under the Forest
Department. He joined the office of the respondent on 13.12.2017. A disciplinary
proceeding was initiated on 17.03.2021 which has not been concluded yet.
Respondents are not in sincere endeavour to conclude the departmental enquiry
proceeding. As many as three inquiry authorities have been changed. It is now at the
stage of examination of prosecution witnesses. But after 15.03.2023, the enquiry
proceeding has not been continued for no reasons. The delay in conclusion is causing
delay in petitioner's regularization in service.
It is further contended by the counsel for the petitioner that in the inquiry
proceeding preliminary hearing was done on 21.02.2022 and next date was fixed on
28.02.2022. But no inquiry was held on that date. Later on, order of cancellation of the
date was given to him on 09.03.2022 from the office of the Sub-Divisional Forest
Officer, Sonamura, Sepahijala.
Further, it has been contended that the respondent authorities are not
acting in the accordance with the Memorandum dated 17.07.2004, issued by the
GA(AR) Department, Government of Tripura which sets timelines of six months to
conclude the departmental inquiry proceeding. Not only that, Hon'ble Supreme Court
in judgment dated 16.12.2015 in Prem Nath Bali vs High Court of Delhi has observed
that every employer must make sincere endeavour to conclude the departmental
enquiry proceeding within six months. But respondents do not follow this and drag the
enquiry proceeding for indefinite period.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In view of said submission, without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, this present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to expedite
the matter as early as possible, preferably within a period of 6 months from the date of
receipt of copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner herein.
With the above observation and direction, this present writ petition stands
disposed of. As a sequel, stay, if any, stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any,
also stands closed.
JUDGE
Dipak
DIPAK DAS DIPAK DAS
Date: 2024.03.07
14:45:13 +05'30'
