Tripura High Court
Amal Chandra Das vs The State Of Tripura & Others on 9 May, 2024
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.57 of 2024
Amal Chandra Das
.........Petitioner(s);
Versus
The State of Tripura & others
.........Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate,
Mr. Kawsik Nath, Advocate,
Mr. Dipjyoti Paul, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, G.A.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
Order
09/05/2024
Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:
"(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 directing the respondents to give the benefit of
regular pay scale to the petitioner w.e.f. the date on which the petitioner
completed 5 years Govt. service including the period served by the petitioner as
Graduate Teacher w.e.f. 14.12.2016 to 19.07.2017 and thereafter w.e.f.
20.07.2017 in the post of Post Graduate Teacher on fixed pay basis against the
fixed pay posts created keeping in abeyance regular pay scale posts along with
ancillary and consequential, pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits.
(ii) Make the rules absolute.
(iii) Call for records
(iv) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court considered
fit and proper."
2. The brief facts of the case, as pleaded by the writ petitioner, are
referred to hereinafter. Petitioner contended that he initially joined as Graduate
Teacher under the Directorate of Elementary Education on 14.12.2016.
Thereafter he appeared in the STPGT 2016 under TRBT with No Objection
Certificate from the competent authority and got selected in the post of Post
Graduate Teacher. Technical resignation tendered by the petitioner was
accepted by the department and he joined in the post of Post Graduate Teacher
under the Directorate of Secondary Education on 20.07.2017. He was granted
regular scale with effect from 20.07.2022. It is submitted that the past service
rendered by the petitioner as Graduate Teacher w.e.f. 14.12.2016 to 19.07.2017
was not taken into consideration while regularizing his service. It is also
submitted that petitioner was granted regular scale w.e.f. 20.07.2022 instead of
14.12.2021 without taking into consideration the past service rendered by the
petitioner. 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. Petitioner
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. According to the petitioner, 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 petitioner on 17.12.2021 has not yet been acted
upon. Therefore, he has approached this Court.
3. Mr. Kawsik Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that
the respondents may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner
in accordance with law and grant the aforesaid benefits. He also relies upon a
decision of this Court in the case of Tarendra Reang & others v. The State of
Tripura & others in WP(C) No.234 of 2020 and other batch matters wherein
pursuant to the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by this Court, those writ
petitioners have been granted 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 petitioner also.
4. Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, learned Government Advocate
for the respondents-State, submits that instructions are awaited in this matter.
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
petitioner 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.
5. Having regard to the nature of relief sought for by the petitioner,
since the representation of the petitioner 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 his representation in accordance with law within a
reasonable period preferably within 16(sixteen) weeks from the date of receipt
of copy of this order.
6. 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: 2024.05.15 12:02:10 +05'30'
