Tripura High Court
Sri Dipak Shil & Others vs The State Of Tripura & Others on 2 May, 2024
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.309 of 2024
Sri Dipak Shil & others
.........Petitioner(s);
Versus
The State of Tripura & others
.........Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, G.A.,
Mrs. Riya Chakraborty, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
Order
02/05/2024
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the benefit of past
service for all purposes including pension, gratuity, leave at credit, pay
protection, counting of the period for the purpose of determining five years'
fixed pay period and extend the arrears of financial benefits in their favour upon
grant of such benefit. The brief facts of the case as pleaded are referred to
hereinafter. Petitioners contend that they participated in the fresh selection
process after obtaining No Objection Certificate from their previous employer
and got selected in the post of Post Graduate Teacher. Thereafter, they also
took technical resignation which was accorded to them to join in the new post
of Post Graduate Teacher. They joined in the new post of Post Graduate
Teacher through proper channel and also took technical resignation to join in
the new post. The Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
Government of India has also issued an office memorandum dated 17.08.2016
regarding the effect of the technical resignation. The said memo is also adopted
in the State of Tripura and it provides that in case of Technical Resignation, the
past service of an employee is counted for all purposes. The resignation is
treated as technical resignation if the employee has applied through proper
channel for a post in the same or some other department and on selection is
required to resign from the previous post for administrative reasons. Petitioners
contend that similarly situated teachers had approached this Court by filing
WP(C) No.722/2022 and vide judgment and order dated 17.03.2023, this Court
had directed the department to consider their representations. Thereafter, vide
memorandum dated 17.12.2023, three writ petitioners have been granted the
benefit of past service. In WP(C) No.141/2024 in the case of Sri Anup Baul &
others v. The State of Tripura & others, this Court directed the respondents to
consider the representation of the petitioners and pass appropriate order in light
of the memorandum dated 17.12.2023. According to the petitioners, the instant
case is also covered by the judgment and order dated 06.01.2021 passed in
WP(C) No.234/2020 and other batch matters wherein this Court extended
benefit of past service to persons appointed to teaching posts from non-teaching
posts. The representation made by the petitioners on 04.04.2024 has not yet
been acted upon. Therefore, they have approached this Court.
2. Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that
the respondents may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioners
in accordance with law and grant the aforesaid benefits. He also relies upon the
case of Sri Dilip Shil & others v. The State of Tripura & others in WP(C)
No.722 of 2022 wherein pursuant to the order dated 17.03.2023 passed by this
Court, those writ petitioners have been grated the benefit of past service. As
such, the respondents may be directed to take a decision in accordance with law
in respect of the present petitioners also.
3. Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, learned Government Advocate
for the respondents-State, submits that the instant petition has been taken up for
the first time. Therefore, instructions are awaited. However, since the
consideration on this issue at the first instance lies before the competent
authority under the department; in case the representation of the petitioners has
not been considered on account of enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct,
the respondent-department would consider it in accordance with law in a
suitable time as may be directed by this Court.
4. Having regard to the nature of relief sought for by the petitioners,
since the representation of the petitioners is pending before the concerned
respondent authority, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case deems it proper to direct the competent authority/respondent No.2 to
take a decision upon their representation in accordance with law within a
reasonable period preferably within 16(sixteen) weeks from the date of receipt
of copy of this order.
5. The instant petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ
Pijush/
MUNNA SAHA Digitally signed by MUNNA SAHA
Date: 2024.05.03 13:49:28 +05'30'
