Tripura High Court
Sri Subhasish Ghosh vs The State Of Tripura on 11 February, 2025
Page 1 of 8
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.413 of 2024
Sri Subhasish Ghosh,
S/o Lt. Jahar Lal Ghosh,
05/08 Indranagar, South Side of Dairy,
P.O. Indranagar, Agartala,
Kunjaban, West Tripura,
Tripura 799006.
........Petitioner(s)
-Versus-
1. The State of Tripura,
To be represented by the Secretary,
PWD (R&B), Govt. of Tripura, New Capital Complex,
New Secretariat Building, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799010.
2. The Secretary, Finance Department,
Govt. of Tripura, New Capital Complex,
New Secretariat Building, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799010.
3. The Chief Engineer (R&B),
Govt. of Tripura, New Capital Complex,
New Secretariat Building, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799010.
........ Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
Date of hearing and delivery : 11th February, 2025.
of Judgment & Order
Whether fit for reporting : NO.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
JUDGMENT & ORDER (Oral)
Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel appearing
for the petitioner and Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing
for the respondents-State.
In terms of the order dated 24.01.2025, an affidavit has
been submitted by the respondents-State.
2. The petitioner's case is that he was engaged as Casual
Worker, Group-D on 11.11.1992 by Public Works Department (for short,
PWD) under the control of Executive Engineer, Mechanical Division,
Agartala and continued as Casual Worker (Group-D) in the Department
until his regularization as Helper, Group-D on 01.07.2008. When he was
initially engaged as Casual Worker vide memorandum dated 11.11.1992
(Annexure-R/1), his academic qualification was Madhyamik plucked but
subsequently in the year 1994, he passed his Secondary School
Examination from National Open School, New Delhi. He also completed
the course of I.T.I. (Trade Welder) in the year 1989 before his
engagement as Casual Worker.
3. According to Mr. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel,
though the petitioner's name was recorded as Casual Worker, Group-D
but he rendered his service in the Department as a Technical person of
Group-C category. He also obtained HSLC certificate in the year 1994.
Thereafter, pursuant to memorandum bearing
No.F.10(2)FIN(G)/2008(Part), dated 01.09.2008 (Annexure-8), of
Finance Department, the DRWs/Contingent/Casual Workers appointed
on temporary basis were regularized vide office order dated 08.06.2009
(Annexure-5), issued by the PWD, w.e.f. 01.07.2008 wherein name of
the present petitioner stood at serial No.52 with mentioning of his
designation as 'Helper(Mech.)'. Before issuance of that office order, on
11.11.2008 (Annexure-6), as a preparatory step to their regularization,
another memorandum was issued by the Department (Annexure-6),
wherein name of the present petitioner was mentioned against serial
No.99 showing him as Casual Worker, Group-D and his qualification was
mentioned as Madhyamik plucked. The petitioner has submitted a
photocopy the marksheet, dated 24.08.1994 (Annexure-2) of his
qualifying Secondary School Examination in June, 1994. It is also
submitted by the learned senior counsel that as a Casual Worker, the
petitioner was paid wages @ Rs.81.76 vide office order No.42, dated
14.05.2009 (Annexure-4), which was the wage of a Group-C, Technician
but despite the same he was regularized in Group-D post. With such
grievances the writ petition has been submitted with the following
prayers :
"a) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to
why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other
order/orders shall not be issued whereby directing the
Respondents to regularize the Petitioner with all incidental
and consequential benefit in the post of Group-C w.e.f.
01.07.2008 on which date the Petitioner was regularized in
the post of Helper, Group-D after completion of 10 years as
Casual Worker, Group-D since his initial engagement on
11.11.1992.
b) Make the rules absolute.
c) Call for records.
d) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court
considered fit and proper."
4. Further, learned senior counsel raises a contention referring
to an office order dated 29.05.2021 (Annexure-9) of the Department,
that service of another similarly situated person, namely Sri Sibu Deb
was regularized w.e.f. 01.01.2007 as Work Assistant, Group-C in
suppression of his earlier regularization of service as Peon, Group-D.
For reference, the entire office order under Annexure-9 is extracted
herein below :
GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (R&B)
No.F.6(29)-PWD(E-II)/07(Part-I)/1447-54 Dated, Agartala the 29th May, 2021
OFFICE ORDER
Consequent upon endorsement given by the Finance Department,
Government of Tripura vide U.O. No.1664/Fin(L)/07, dated 07/12/2007 & the
subsequent concurrence obtained from the Finance Department, Government of
Tripura vide U.O No.970/FIN(ESTT-III)/2021, dated 22/01/2021 as well as by the
Law Department, Government of Tripura vide Note No-17 followed by approval
accorded from PWD vide U.O No.883..Secretary, PWD, dated 03/05/2021, a fresh
appointment in favour of Shri Sibu Deb to the post of Work Assistant Group C
on regular basis with effect from the date of regularisation in the earlier
Group-D post in cancellation of his earlier appointment as Peon, Group-D
issued vide Order No.F.6(29)-PWD(E-II)/2007, dated 10/01/2008 of the Chief
Engineer, PWD (R&B) is being made with the following place of posting mention
against Column :-
Name of Category of Whether Date of Pay Scale Present Proposed
Candidate Post in belongs regularisation AS per Place of place of
which to w.e.f. as ROP 2009 Posting posting
regularizatio SC/ST/ Group-C
n will be UR
effected
Shri Sibu Work UR 01-01-2007 Rs.3300/- O/o the O/o the
Deb Assistant - Chief Assistant
Group-C Rs.7100/- Engineer. Engineer,
PWD Central
(NH), P.N. VII Sub
Complex, Division,
Agartala, PWD
Tripura(W (R&B),
est) Agartala.
His pay scale may be fixed in the relevant grade for regularisation with
prospective effect & his pay be notionally fixed with effect from 01/01/2007 & all
other terms and conditions of service as applicable to the Work Assistant, Group-C
employee of the Government of Tripura will be enforced for his case.
Shri Deb is also directed to join in his new place of posting on 01/06/2021
without fail. No TA/DA is admissible for joining to the post at the place of posting.
Er. Dipak Chandra Das
Engineer-in-Chief, PWD
Government of Tripura
5. Learned senior counsel also submits that said Sri Sibu Deb,
was engaged as Casual Worker and did not have the qualification of
Madhyamik pass at the time of his initial engagement like the present
petitioner and he obtained the same later on before the date of his
regularization as Group-D and when said order came to the notice of the
Department, immediately the same error was corrected by
regularization of his service against Group-C post with retrospective
effect from the date of his original regularization as Group-D.
6. Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A., on the other hand,
referring to the list of employees as annexed in the memorandum dated
11.11.2008 (Annexure-6), submits that the petitioner in said list has
been shown as Casual Worker, Group-D. Therefore, at the time of
regularization, he was regularized as a Group-D employee. However,
learned Addl. G.A. admits that despite his engagement as Group-D
worker, he would receive the wage of Group-C, Casual Worker at the
above said rate of Rs.81.76. The next point as raised by the learned
Addl. G.A. is that the petitioner obtained the qualification of Madhyamik
pass without taking permission from the Department. Learned Addl.
G.A. further referring to a letter of Executive Engineer addressed to
Engineering Officer dated 15.11.2008 (Annexure-3), submits that on
asking the petitioner himself produced Madhyamik plucked marksheet
which was forwarded by the Executive Engineer to the Office of Chief
Engineer and for that reason, he was regularized against the post of
Group-D.
7. I have given anxious consideration to the rival submissions
of the parties and also have taken note of the materials placed on
record by the parties.
8. Learned senior counsel has relied on a decision of
Coordinate Bench of this Court passed in WP(C) No.410 of 2024, in a
case between Smt. Anima Debnath versus The State of Tripura &
Others, wherein said Smt. Anima Debnath was also engaged as Casual
Worker in PWD on 12.08.1992 but later on, she passed Madhyamik
Examination in the year 1994. On 01.07.2008, her service was
regularized as Peon, Group-D though in case of above said Sri Sibu Deb,
his service was later on regularized against Group-C post. In that
backdrop, said Smt. Anima Debnath with similar prayer like the present
petitioner filed the said writ petition before this Court. The Court finally
directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for her
appointment as Group-C employee in accordance with the Recruitment
Rules prescribed for the post of Group-C within a period of 3(months)
months. Learned senior counsel submits that in compliance with the said
judgment, the Department has already regularized the service of Smt.
Anima Debnath against Group-C post.
9. Learned senior counsel also relies on another decision of this
Court, dated 13.09.2024, in a case between Smt. Aparajita Bhowmik
versus The State of Tripura & Others, in WP(C) No.411 of 2024,
and submits that said Smt. Aparajita Bhowmik was also similarly
situated person like, Smt. Anima Debnath and said Sri Sibu Deb and her
service was also regularized after the judgment passed by this Court in
said WP(C) No.411 of 2024 for her regularization against the Group-C
post. Learned senior counsel also refers to an office order dated
02.01.2025, to show that service of said Smt. Aparajita Bhowmik was
also regularized against Group-C post with retrospective effect from
01.07.2008 in terms of the direction of this Court.
10. So far the point raised by the learned Addl. G.A. that
without obtaining No Objection Certificate (for short, NOC) from the
competent authority for appearing in Madhyamik Examination was
concerned, said matter was already decided by the Court in said Smt.
Anima Debnath(supra) and Smt. Aparajita Bhowmik(supra) with
observations that non-obtaining of NOC from the competent authority
for appearing in Madhyamik Examination cannot be a ground to reject
the claim of the petitioners as they were discharging duties of DRW at
that time.
11. From the Note No.7 of the Finance Department as submitted
by the petitioner, it appears that the Finance Department also expressed
their opinion that the candidate who had passed Madhyamik
Examination and had also received the wages as DRW (Group-C), there
might not be sufficient ground to deny them regularization as Group-C
employee and therefore, the Department was requested to re-examine
their existing stand and if the findings were found in consonance with
the RR of Group-C post, then the benefit of movement to Group-C post
might be allowed to the person prospectively, to avoid litigation.
12. The petitioner has also relied on another Note No.17, dated
19.04.2021, wherein the Law Department also observed that it was not
necessary that on the date of engagement as DRW the candidate have
to pass HSLC Examination. It was to be seen whether the concerned
employee had passed HSLC Examination for the purpose of his
regularization as Group-C.
13. In the affidavit submitted by the respondents pursuant to
order dated 24.01.2025, it has been categorically stated by the
respondents that both the Casual Worker (Clerk) and Casual Worker
(Technical) are Group-C posts based on their wages drawn by the
respective categories of person. The present petitioner also had drawn
the wages of a Casual Worker (Technical), and thus, from such
assertion, it appears that the petitioner was also treated as a Group-C
employee by the Department. Moreover, as it appears, the present case
is also wholly covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Smt.
Anima Debnath(supra) and Smt. Aparajita Bhowmik(supra).
14. Considering all these aspects, the writ petition is allowed.
The respondents-State are directed to consider the case of the present
petitioner for employment as Group-C employee in accordance with the
Recruitment Rules as prescribed for Group-C post within a period of
3(three) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With such observation(s) and direction(s) the present writ
petition is disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
JUDGE
SATABDI Digitally signed by
SATABDI DUTTA
DUTTA Date: 2025.02.14
15:52:49 +05'30'
Dinashree
