[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
The State Of Tripura vs Tripura And Ors on 9 December, 2025
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
WA. No.87 of 2025
1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Chief Secretary, Government of Tripura,
Agartala, Civil Secretariat, P.O. Kunjaban, PIN-799006.
2. The Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Social Welfare and
Social Education, Civil Secretariat, P.O. Kunjaban, Agartala, Pin-799006
3. Additional Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Social Welfare
and Social Education, Civil Secretariat, P.O. Kunjaban, Agartala, Pin-799006.
4. The Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Finance Department,
Civil Secretariat, P.O. Kunjaban, Agartala, PIN-799006.
5. The Director of Social Welfare and Social Education, Government of Tripura,
Abhoynagar, P.O. Abhoynagar, Agartala, P.S. East Agartala, District: West
Tripura, PIN-799005.
6. Additional Director of Social Welfare and Social Education, Government of
Tripura, Abhoynagar, P.O. Abhoynagar, Agartala, P.S. East Agartala, District:
West Tripura, PIN-799005.
7. Child Development Project Officer, Government of Tripura, Melaghar NP ICDS
Project, Melaghar, Sepahijala District.
.....Appellants
_V_E_R_S_U_S_
1. Smti. Jharna Das, wife of Sri Ranjit Das, resident of Gorurbandh, P.O. Urmai, P.S.
Sonamura, District: Sepahijala Tripura.
.....Respondent
2. The Accountant General (A&E), Tripura, Malancha Nivash, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.
West Agartala, District: West Tripura.
.....Pro-forma-respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Pandey, Advocate.
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
_F_I_N_A_L_O_ R_ D_ E_ R_
09.12.2025
Heard.
[2] This is an appeal filed under Chapter-VIII Rule-B (A) as per the High
Court of Tripura Rules, 2023, preferred against the impugned judgment and order
dated 25.04.2025 passed in WP(C) No.799 of 2023 by the learned Single Judge.
[3] The appellants have sought for the following reliefs:
(i) Admit the appeal.
(ii) Call for the records of the impugned judgment & order dated 25.04.2025 in
WP(C) No.799 of 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge.
(iii) Issue notice.
(iv) After hearing the parties be pleased to set aside the said impugned
judgment & order dated 25.04.2025 in WP(C) No.799 of 2023 passed by the
learned Single Judge and also dismiss the writ petition."
[4] The facts in brief are that the petitioner/respondent herein is the
retired School Mother who claimed for past service before the date of her
regularization as per several judgments passed by this Court allowing the past
service rendered as fixed pay wages. In contrary, the stand of the State respondent
is since the matter has been decided in the Council of Ministers that the scheme of
past service only to be applicable to those School Mothers who have not completed
10 years of service as regular employee in that event past service rendered as fixed
pay wages would be counted for the purpose of pension and other retiral benefits.
On the same theory, who completed 10 years of service as regular employee
including the petitioner would not be required to count for past service for the
purpose of pension and other retiral benefits.
[5] Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the
learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.799 of 2023 has observed as under:
"[13] The writ petition is accordingly allowed. The respondent authority shall
accordingly count the service rendered by the petitioner from the date of her
joining as School Mother on consolidated fixed pay pursuant to the
acknowledgment letter dated 13.07.1990 till her regularization be counted as
her regular service on and from 25.07.1990 to 01.10.2007 till her
superannuation on 31.03.2022 for calculating her pension and other retiral
benefits. The respondent authority shall ensure that the pension is accordingly
fixed and all retiral benefits be released in favour of the petitioner within a
period of 4(four) months along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date
of retirement of the petitioner till payment/deposit of the amount. The writ
petition is accordingly stands disposed of."
[6] Having been contrary on this point, the appellant-State has preferred
this writ appeal against the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.
[7] Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the appellant-
State in the midst of hearing has placed an order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.(s) 32435-32438/2025 and
submitted that the matter has been decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue
involved herein and observed as under:
"1. Delay condoned.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.
3. The High Court while passing the impugned an earlier order has placed
reliance on Division Bench decision of the High Court in State of Smt. Mamata
Rani Roy (Saha) vs. Tripura and Ors.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that Mamata Rani
Roy (Saha) has since attained finality.
5. In such circumstances, we decline to entertain the petitions, the special leave
petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.
6. Pending application(s), stand disposed of. if any, shall"
[8] He further represented that they are ready to close the present issue in
terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex by confirming the judgment and
order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.
[9] Having heard the learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the appellant-
State and perusal of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the present appeal stands
disposed of by confirming the judgment and order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the
learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.799 of 2023.
[10] As a sequel, miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall also
stand closed.
S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J DR.T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
A. Ghosh
ANJAN GHOSH GHOSH
Date: 2025.12.17 13:59:08 +05'30'
