Tripura High Court
Mrs. Taniya Aktar vs The State Of Tripura To Be Represented By on 10 April, 2025
Page 1 of 6
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.45 of 2025
Mrs. Taniya Aktar,
W/o Late Jalil Miah, Resident of Town Sonamura,
Ward No.21, Udaipur Municipality,
P.S. & P.O: R.K Pur, Gomati District, Tripura.
....Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Tripura to be represented by
the Secretary, Home Affairs, Government of Tripura,
Secretariat, New Capital Complex, Kunjaban,
Agartala, Pin: 799010.
2. The Director General of Police,
Government of Tripura, Police Head Quarters,
Agartala, Pin: 799001.
3. The Superintendent of Police (GRP),
Government of Tripura A.D. Nagar, Agartala,
West Tripura, Pin: 799010.
4. Mrs. Julekha Bibi,
W/o Mohan Miah, Resident of Town Sonamura,
Ward No.21, Udaipur Municipality,
P.S. & P.O: R.K. Pur, Gomati District, Tripura.
....Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, Sr. Adv.
: Mr. Dipjyoti Paul, Adv.
: Mr. Mihirlal Roy, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A.
: Mr. Sankar Lodh, Adv.
: Mr. Subham Majumder, Adv.
Date of hearing and delivery : 10th April, 2025.
of Judgment & Order
Whether fit for reporting : NO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, learned senior
counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. De,
learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State-respondent nos.1 to 3
as well as Mr. Sankar Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent no.4.
[2] The allegation of the petitioner in brief as canvassed
in the petition is that her husband Jalil Miah was working as a
Constable under Tripura Police and was posted in the office of the
Superintendent of Police (GRP), Government of Tripura. While in
service, he died his natural death on 23.01.2024 leaving behind
him the present petitioner (wife), respondent no.4 (mother) and
one Ms. Afrin Akthar, (minor daughter aged about 4 years).
[3] According to Mr. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel,
the daughter of the deceased is living with her mother and after
the death of said Jalil Miah, the petitioner having academic
qualification of (HS+2) passed, applied for job under Die-In-
Harness Scheme on 07.03.2024, but till date same has not been
provided as her mother-in-law i.e. the respondent no.4 did not
issue 'no objection certificate' in her favour. The petitioner also
again approached the respondent no.3 for such compassionate
appointment by her letter dated 05.08.2024, but in turn, the
respondent no.3 vide letter dated 19.09.2024 asked her to obtain
undertaking from the family members of the deceased for
processing the family pension, gratuity, leave salary etc. Anyway,
as mother-in-law, according to the petitioner, did not issue the
no objection certificate, ultimately she did not get any financial
benefit nor she got any job under Die-In-Harness Scheme and
hence the present writ petition has been filed.
[4] Mr. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel submits that
the respondent no.4 is now 48 years old and, therefore, she
cannot apply for any job under Die-In-Harness Scheme, but
despite the same she was not issuing any no objection certificate
in favour of the petitioner despite the fact that the petitioner has
already furnished an undertaking to the department that she
would maintain her mother-in-law after getting such job.
[5] Mr. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel also submits
that as per the scheme itself, the petitioner is duty bound to
maintain her mother-in-law and moreover, she has no objection
regarding distribution of post death service benefits of the
deceased to all the dependent legal representatives in
accordance with law.
[6] Mr. K. De, learned Addl. G.A. for the State
respondents submits that due to non-furnishing of necessary
documents, the department is not in a position to process the
matter and after such documents are submitted by the parties,
the matter will be processed as per Rules.
[7] Mr. Sankar Lodh, learned counsel for respondent no.4,
on the other hand, submits that there was very strained marital
relationship between deceased Jalil Miah and the petitioner and
even she had grown some extra marital relationship with another
person and thrice she left her matrimonial home without
informing anybody and even at the time of death of the deceased
she was not in her matrimonial home and, therefore, the mother-
in-law has certain grievances against the present petitioner in
issuing said no objection certificate. However, Mr. Lodh, learned
counsel further submits that if the petitioner undertakes to
maintain the respondent no.4, she will have no objection in
issuing such certificate. Mr. Lodh, learned counsel also urges for
disbursement of other post death service benefit of Jalil Miah to
the dependent legal representatives as per rules.
[8] According to Mr. Lodh, learned counsel, earlier the
deceased husband of the petitioner filed one case for restitution
of his conjugal rights bearing no. Title Suit (RCR) No.17 of 2020
before the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, Gomati Tripura District
which was pending at the time of death of the deceased.
[9] This court has considered the rival submissions and
also taken note of all the documents submitted by the parties in
the petition.
[ 10 ] It appears that for certain reasons, relationship
between the mother-in-law and the petitioner has become
unpleasant to some extent and, therefore, such 'No Objection
Certificate' was not issued by the mother-in-law till date.
However, during hearing, it has been clarified by Mr. Lodh,
learned counsel that she has now no objection in issuing such 'No
Objection Certificate' in favour of the petitioner provided that an
undertaking is to be executed by the petitioner to the effect that
she would maintain respondent no.4 after getting such job under
the Scheme and will co-operate in proper distribution of all the
post death financial benefits of Late Jalil Miah to the persons
entitled to it as per Rules.
[ 11 ] What appears is that there might have some conjugal
disputes between the petitioner and her husband which even
resulted in filing of one petition for restitution of conjugal rights
by the husband. Both of them might have some grievances
against each other, but fact remains there was no dissolution of
their marriage tie and, therefore, a valid marriage was subsisting
between them till the date of death of Late Jalil Miah. Even said
Jalil Miah intended to get the petitioner back in his life and,
therefore, at the time of death of Jalil Miah, the petitioner was
having the status of a legally married wife.
[ 12 ] In view of the submission of Mr. Lodh, learned counsel
that respondent no.4 has no objection in granting any job under
Die-In-Harness Scheme in favour of the petitioner, there is no
further necessity to insist for such 'no objection certificate' to be
executed by the respondent no.4. Rather, for all practical
purposes, it will be deemed that respondent no.4 has issued such
certificate.
[ 13 ] Now, therefore, considering all aspects, respondent
nos. 1 to 3 are directed to consider the application of the
petitioner for providing her job under Die-In-Harness Scheme in
accordance with the provision of said Scheme for Compassionate
Appointment/Benefit for Government Employees of Tripura
issued vide notification dated 02.03.2019 after all other
necessary documents are submitted by her, treating that such
no-objection is already issued by respondent no.4. The
department will however obtain proper undertaking in prescribed
format from the petitioner in terms of Clause 14 of that Scheme
to the effect that she would be duty bound to maintain the family
members of the government servant in case such compassionate
appointment is provided to her. Needless to say, if after getting
any such appointment, the petitioner defaults in her such
undertaking, the appropriate authority of the State-respondents
will be at liberty to take any such action against the petitioner in
accordance with law/rules. The State-respondents shall also take
further necessary steps for disbursement of other post death
service benefits of the deceased including family pension,
gratuity to the eligible persons as per Rules on submission of
other related documents and observance of other codal
formalities. Entire exercise should be completed by the State-
respondents within 12 (twelve) weeks on submission of other
required documents.
It is also informed by learned Addl. G.A. that
necessary application for such compassionate appointment has
not been submitted in prescribed format by the petitioner.
Therefore, liberty is given to the petitioner to submit the same in
prescribed format immediately which will be treated as
continuation of her previous application submitted in this regard.
In terms of the above, the writ petition is disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
JUDGE
Riki Digitally signed by
SATABDI SATABDI DUTTA
Date: 2025.04.16 13:47:41
DUTTA +05'00'
