Tripura High Court
The Union Of India vs Sri Biltu Saha on 1 October, 2024
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Review Pet. No.24 of 2024
1. The Union of India, through the Comptroller and Auditor General of India,
Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg, New Delhi-110124.
2. The Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, P.O.- Kunjaban, Agartala,
Tripura-7990006
.........Petitioner(s);
Versus
1. Sri Biltu Saha, Assistant Audit Officer, S/O.- Sri Kalidas Saha, O/o the Pr.
Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, Agartala, P.O Kunjaban, Agartala,
Tripura, Pin-799006
2. Sri Niranjan Nayak, Assistant Audit Officer, S/O.- Sri Prafulla Kumar
Nayak, O/o the Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, Agartala, P.O
Kunjaban, Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006
3. Sri Seiminlal Singsit, Assistant Audit Officer, S/O.- Sri Haopao Singsit,
O/o the Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, Agartala, P.O Kunjaban,
Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006
4. Sri Helun Kipeng, Assistant Audit Officer, S/O Sri Paokhosei Kipeng, O/o
the Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, Agartala, P.O Kunjaban,
Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006
5. Sri Peeyoosh Kumar, Assistant Audit Officer, S/O. Ram Sukh Bhartiya,
O/o the Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, Agartala P.O Kunjaban,
Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006
6. Shri Nripendra Chandra Biswas (Audit Officer now Retired Senior Audit
Officer) O/o the Pr. Accountant General (Audit), Tripura, P.O Kunjaban,
Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006
7. Shri Rupak Debbarma (Assistant Audit Officer) O/o the Pr. Accountant
General (Audit), Tripura PO Kunjaban, Agartala, Tripura, Pin-799006.
8. Sri Rohan Das, (Assistant Audit Officer) O/o the Pr. Accountant General
(Audit), Tripura, P.O Kunjaban, Agartala, Tripura, Pin- 799006
.........Respondent(s).
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Debalay Bhattacharya, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. Samar Das, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : None.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. PURKAYASTHA
Order
01/10/2024
Heard Mr. Debalay Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel assisted
by Mr. Samar Das, learned counsel for the review petitioners.
2. The Union of India has sought review of the judgment dated
05.08.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C)(CAT) No.02/2024 whereby this
Court has refused to interfere in the order dated 14.12.2023 passed by learned
Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in Original Application
No.041/00161/2018.
3. Mr. Debalay Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel for the
petitioners, has drawn the attention of the Court to para 5.6.6 which is part of
the CAG's Manual of Standing Orders (Administrative) Volume-I (Third
Edition) under Chapter V dealing with Section Officers' service. He submits
that the instant provision postulates that a directly recruited Section Officer
shall rank immediately below the last Section Officers' Examination passed
member of the staff officiating in the Section Officers grade on the date on
which he takes over charge as a regular Section Officer. Therefore, in terms
of the instant administrative instruction, the directly recruited Section Officers
even after passing of the probation exam would rank junior to the
promoted Section Officers. It is submitted that though the applicants/private
respondents herein before the learned CAT, may have joined service
prior to the promotee officers on the post of Section Officers, but since
they passed the probation exam later and were confirmed as regular
officer, their seniority would count from the date they became regular
Section Officer. This aspect of the matter has not been properly dealt
with by this Court in the impugned judgment. Therefore, a review
of the impugned order has been sought for. He submits that the
judgment passed in CWP No.49 of 2017 by the High Court of Himachal
Pradesh in the case of CAG and another v. Deepak Sharma & others was
challenged before the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary
No.12997/2024. However, the Apex Court vide judgment dated 17.05.2024
has refused to interfere in the judgment and order passed by the High Court of
Himachal Pradesh in the case of Deepak Sharma (supra) and dismissed the
special leave petition. He submits that a review petition has been filed before
the Apex Court against the said judgment. However, the final outcome thereof
is awaited. On these grounds, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has
prayed for review of the impugned judgment.
4. We have considered the submission of learned senior counsel for
the petitioners and taken note of the grounds urged. Upon consideration of the
submission of learned senior counsel for the petitioners, none of the grounds
urged make out a case of review of the impugned judgment. The relevant para
5.6.6 relied upon by learned senior counsel for the petitioners has been
squarely dealt with by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWP No.49 of
2017 and has also been taken note of in the impugned judgment by this Court.
Moreover, the judgment in the case of Deepak Sharma (supra) rendered by
the High Court of Himachal Pradesh has been affirmed by the Apex Court in
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.12997/2024. This Court has followed
the ratio rendered in the case of Deepak Sharma (supra) wherein it was held
that the Union of India did not have the power to issue instructions as
mentioned in para 5.6.2 and 5.6.6 of the Standing Orders which are not in
consonance with the Recruitment Rules of 1989. As such, petitioners have
failed to make out a case for review of the impugned judgment. The instant
petition is accordingly dismissed.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(S.D. PURKAYASTHA), J (APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ
Pijush/
DIPESH DEB Digitally signed by DIPESH DEB
Date: 2024.10.04 16:21:46 +05'30'
