Tripura High Court
Sri Dinesh Dutta vs The State Of Tripura on 13 September, 2024
Author: Arindam Lodh
Bench: Arindam Lodh
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.529 of 2023
Sri Dinesh Dutta, son of Sri Late Jayanta Dutta, resident of village
Gourangar, P.O. Samatal Padmabill, P.S. Khowai, District-Khowai, aged
about 55 years.
....Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Commissioner & Secretary,
Education Department, Government of Tripura, having his office at New
Secretariat Complex, Gurkhabasti, Agartala, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New
Capital Complex, Sub-Division-Sadar, District-West Tripura.
2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Education Department, Government of
Tripura, having his office at New Secretariat Complex, Gurkhabasti,
Agartala, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, Sub-Division-Sadar,
District-West Tripura.
3. The Director, Department of Elementary Education, Government of
Tripura, having its office at Shiksha Bhawan Office Lane, P.O. Agartala,
P.S. West Agartala, District-West Tripura.
4. The State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (erstwhile Sarva
Shiksha Abhiyan) having its office at Shiksha Bhawan, Office Lane, P.O.
Agartala, P.S. West Agartala, District-West Tripura.
....Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate
Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Dey, Advocate General
Ms. A. Chakraborty, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Order
13/09/2024
Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P.
Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.
S.S. Dey, learned Advocate General assisted by Ms. A. Chakraborty,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State.
By means of filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed
for counting his past service for the period he served as contract teacher for
upper primary under SSA scheme.
The case of the petitioner is that during his service tenure as contract
Teacher for upper primary under SSA, the petitioner having qualified in
TET appeared in the selection process for appointment to the post of Post
Graduate Teachers. The petitioner submitted technical resignation which
was accepted by the competent authority. Having successful in the
examination, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Post Graduate
Teacher under the State Education Department. After such appointment, the
petitioner had submitted representation to count his past service for the
period he had served as contract teacher for upper primary under SSA
scheme, which was not considered by the respondents-State. Hence, this
writ petition.
Both the learned counsel appearing for the parties had relied upon a
judgment passed by this Court in Sri Uttam Kumar Das and Ors. vs. State
of Tripura and Ors. in WP(C) No.901 of 2021 and other connected writ
petitions. While disposing of the writ petition filed by Sri Uttam Kumar
Das, learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment and order dated
20.05.2022 had observed and decided thus:
"[10] If that observation of the apex court in Ajoy Debbarma
(supra) is read with Para-125 of Tanmoy Nath (supra) it becomes
clear that if the persons who were selected in the previous
selection are again selected, then the service rendered by them
earlier shall be counted for the purpose of seniority, pension and
all other purposes. It is an unambiguous direction, not factored by
any other considerations. It is apparent that the persons who are
appointed during the period of age relaxation should be given the
benefit of the past service. In Sangita Reang (supra) this court
had occasion to direct that the candidates who fall broadly in the
three categories as identified, would be extended the benefit in the
manner as reiterated below:
(i) In case of Category-I cases, the petitioners
shall receive full benefit of the past service for the
purpose of seniority, pension and all other purposes.
(ii) In Category-II cases, past service rendered by
the petitioners will be counted for the purpose of
pension, pay fixation and all other purposes except for
seniority. In other words, it is provided that the pay of
these petitioners would be fixed in their respective posts
pursuant to fresh appointments taking into account
entire past service rendered by them and bearing in
mind the principles contained in F.R.22 of the
Fundamental Rules. However, their past service shall
not count towards seniority. They would be placed at
the bottom of seniority as on the date of their fresh
appointments. It is clarified that these directions shall
not enable any other teachers in the same cadre or any
other cadre to claim upgradation of his/her pay by
seeking removal of anomaly or in any other manner.
(iii) In Category-III cases, the petitioners" past
service would be counted for the limited purpose of
retaining their leave credit, provident fund, pension and
gratuity and further that they will be placed in the
regular scale of pay from the date of their fresh
appointment and the pay will be fixed at the minimum of
the scale. They would receive all admissible
allowances."
Both the learned counsel for the parties have submitted that the
respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner, if the
reliefs claimed by the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision
rendered in the case of Sri Uttam Kumar Das(supra).
Such consideration shall be taken within a period of 2(two) months.
Needless to say, if the respondents find the petitioner eligible to get the
similar benefit as provided in the case of Sri Uttam Kumar Das (supra),
then, such benefit shall be extended to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ
petition stands disposed.
JUDGE
Snigdha
SAIKAT Digitally signed
by SAIKAT KAR
KAR Date: 2024.09.13
16:35:30 +05'30'
