Tripura High Court
Smt. Satarupa Sengupta vs The State Of Tripura & Others on 17 March, 2025
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WA No.122 of 2024
Smt. Satarupa Sengupta
.........Appellant(s);
Versus
The State of Tripura & others
.........Respondent(s).
WA No.26 of 2025
Gautam Ghosh
.........Appellant(s);
Versus
The State of Tripura & others
.........Respondent(s).
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate,
Mr. Kawsik Nath, Advocate,
Mr. Dipjyoti Paul, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ratan Datta, Advocate.
Mrs. Pinki Chakraborty, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. PURKAYASTHA
Order
17/03/2025
The writ petitioners/private respondents herein succeeded before
the learned Single Judge against the seniority list where the private
respondents, who are the appellants herein, were shown as senior to the
petitioners. As per the petitioners, they were senior in the merit list prepared
after the recruitment exercise pursuant to the advertisement at Annexure-2 to
the memo of appeal. Both the writ petitioners and the private respondents had
joined the post of Junior Environmental Engineer in the respondents-Tripura
State Pollution Control Board before the cut-off date fixed for joining. The
respondents-Board had issued a seniority list dated 19.09.2023 [Annexure-11]
wherein the private respondents herein were shown as senior. The respondents-
Board and the State both sought to justify it on the ground that
services of the private respondents were confirmed earlier to the appellants.
The learned Single Judge has held that if the appointment is made from a
common merit list and the employer prescribes a cut-off date for joining; in that
case if the candidates have joined prior to the cut-off date, the seniority position
would be governed as per their position in the merit list. The private respondent
in WP(C) No.655 of 2023 is in appeal as according to her, the case of the
parties is governed by the office order dated 12.07.1960 issued by the
Government of Tripura which was adopted by the Board vide letter dated
18.05.2006. It prescribes that the date of confirmation in such cases would be
determinative of the seniority amongst the respective candidates. In the present
case, it won't be governed by the merit list as there was no such merit list in
question. Only a scorecard was prepared out of the marks obtained in the walk-
in-interview. Therefore the appellants, being aggrieved, have approached this
Court.
The impugned judgment was passed on 14.08.2024 whereby two
writ petitions raising the same issue concerning the employees of the Tripura
State Pollution Control Board were decided.
Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, learned senior counsel for the
appellants, submits that the aggrieved private respondent in WP(C)
No.654/2023 has also preferred an appeal being WA No.26/2025. Since the
issue raised herein is common, therefore, the said writ appeal may also be
tagged along with WA No.122/2024.
Writ Appeal No. 26 of 2025 is therefore being notified and taken
up.
Let notice be issued in both the appeals on the writ petitioners
under ordinary process and speed post for which requisites be filed within one
week.
Notice is made returnable within four weeks.
Mrs. Pinki Chakraborty, learned counsel appears for respondents
No.1 & 2-State and Mr. Ratan Datta, learned counsel appears for respondents
No.3 & 4- Tripura State Pollution Control Board.
(S.D. PURKAYASTHA), J (APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ
Pijush/
MUNNA SAHA Digitally signed by MUNNA SAHA
Date: 2025.03.18 15:30:30 +05'30'
