Tripura High Court
Shri Dipankar Chakraborty vs The Union Of India on 14 February, 2025
Page 1 of 5
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.653 of 2024
Shri Dipankar Chakraborty,
S/o Lt. Anil Chakraborty,
Of village Purba Nalchar, P.O.- Nalchar,
P.S.- Melaghar, Dist.- Sepahijala Tripura,
PIN- 799115, Age- 37 years.
........Petitioner(s)
-Versus-
1. The Union of India,
Represented by the Secretary of Posts,
Dak Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001.
2. The Chief Post Master General, (NE Circle),
HVCP + QP3, Secretariat Hills, Shillong,
P.O.- Shillong, Meghalaya, PIN- 793001.
3. The Director of Postal Services,
Agartala Division, Post Office Choumuhani,
Agartala, Tripura, PIN- 799001.
4. The Inspector of Post,
Circle Office at Bishalgarh, National Highway Road,
Bishalgarh, Boxanagar Road, Sepahijala Tripura, PIN- 799102.
........ Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kousik Roy, Advocate.
Mr. Udai Sankar Singha, Advocate.
Mr. Rohan Chakraborty, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, Dy. SGI.
Date of hearing and delivery : 14th February, 2025.
of Judgment & Order
Whether fit for reporting : NO.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
JUDGMENT & ORDER (Oral)
Heard Mr. Kousik Roy, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI appearing for the
respondents.
2. The case of the petitioner, a graduate is that the father of
the petitioner, namely, Anil Chakraborty was a Dak Peon under the
respondents and was posted at Nalchar. He died in service on
24.03.2024, due to cancer. At the time of his demise, said late Anil
Chakraborty left behind him his wife, Mrs. Saraswati Chakraborty, elder
son Dipankar Chakraborty (Petitioner) and younger son Subhankar
Chakraborty. Both the sons, according to learned counsel of both sides,
applied for a job under Die-in-Harness Scheme. The application of the
petitioner was submitted on 07.06.2024 and his younger brother
submitted it on 03.06.2024.
3. According to the respondents, the petition of the younger
son was accompanied with the nomination by his mother, Mrs.
Saraswati Chakraborty, but the petitioner could not submit such
nomination in his favour. The petitioner served one advocate notice
through Mr. Roy, learned counsel to the respondents. The respondents
also in turn intimidated the said fact of nomination of his younger
brother by his mother through letter dated 22.08.2024 to the petitioner.
Under such circumstances, the writ petition has been filed with the
following prayers:
"a) Admit this petition;
b) Issue notice upon the respondents;
c) Call for the Records;
AND
After hearing the parties Your Lordship would
graciously be pleased to direct the Respondents to cause
an inquiry as to the truthfulness of the matter regarding
the consent of the mother in giving the consent for job
under die in harness to the younger son, and to submit
the report before this Hon'ble Court, for fair ends of
justice;
AND
In the mean time to stay the further proceeding of
the matter by the Respondents.
AND
After hearing the same would be pleased to
consider the prayer of the petitioner to in getting the job
under the die-in-harness scheme.
AND
To pass any other Order/Orders as Your Lordship
seems fit and proper.
AND
For this act of kindness your humble petitioner as in
duty bound shall ever pray."
4. During the hearing Mr. Roy, learned counsel referring to
Gramin Dak Sevaks (Compassionate Engagement) Scheme, 2023,
submits that under Clause 3 of said scheme, first priority is required to
be given to the spouse of the deceased and in case, spouse is not
provided with such job, second priority will be given to the dependent
nominated by that spouse. The relevant provision of Clause 3 is
enumerated hereunder :
"3. Order of priority:-
(i) First priority will be given to spouse of the
deceased GDS. In such cases consent of the spouse will
only be taken.
(ii) Second priority will be given to the dependent
nominated by spouse. In such cases the consent of the
spouse and the nominated dependent will only be
taken.
(iii) In case there is no spouse or GDS was unmarried
at the time of his/her death, the compassionate
engagement may be given to any one of the dependent
family members with the consent of all other
dependents."
5. According to Mr. Roy, learned counsel, the nomination
obtained by the younger brother of the petitioner was not voluntary and
for that reason, same cannot be taken into consideration by the
respondents while granting any job under Die-in-Harness Scheme to the
younger brother of the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that an
inquiry is required to be done as to whether the nomination given by the
mother of the petitioner was voluntarily or not.
6. Mr. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI., on the other hand, submits
that the writ petition itself is not maintainable as both the mother and
younger brother of the petitioner were not impleaded in this case and
moreso, as per the rules, the job is required to be provided to that
person who is nominated by the spouse herself. Therefore, the claim of
the petitioner has no merit in his favour.
7. This Court has taken note of submissions of both learned
counsel and the material placed on records by the parties. Court has
also taken into consideration the above said provision of Clause 3 of the
Scheme of 2023. In the said clause, it is clearly enumerated that second
priority should be given to the dependent nominated by the spouse, and
in such cases, the case of the nominated dependent by the spouse will
only be taken into consideration. However, when some challenges have
been made as to the voluntariness of the mother in respect of such
nomination, as a matter of caution, the respondents should
verify/examine such voluntariness by way of having personal hearing of
the mother of the petitioner.
8. Mr. Roy, learned counsel submits that the respondents have
their own branch Post Office at Nalchar, and the parties are also residing
at Nalchar and therefore, it will be very much convenient for them to
have such personal hearing by instructing any responsible officer of the
respondents posted at Nalchar.
9. In view of above position and taking note of the above said
circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the
respondents will have personal hearing of the mother of the petitioner to
test the voluntariness and genuineness of said nomination through any
of their responsible officer and will dispose of the claim of both the
petitioner and his brother for a job under Die-in-Harness Scheme
accordingly, following the principles laid down in the said scheme of
2023. The entire process should be completed within a period of
8(eight) weeks.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
JUDGE
SATABDI DUTTA Date: 2025.02.15
Dinashree
