[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
Retired Employees Forum Of Subordinate ... vs The State Of Tripura on 12 February, 2026
Page 1 of 6
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
WP(C)No.490 of 2024
RETIRED EMPLOYEES FORUM OF SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY,
TRIPURA,
a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, having its registered
Office at C/o Mihir Singha Roy, Madhya Badharghat near Milan Chakra Club,
P.O. A.D. Nagar, P.S. A.D. Nagar, District-West Tripura, Pin-799003.
represented by its authorized representative, namely, Sri Mrinal Kanti
Chakraborty, son of late Narayan Chakraborty, resident of Banamalipur (west
side of Central Jail), P.O. Agartala, P.S. East Agartala, District-West Tripura,
Pin-799001
..........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1.THE STATE OF TRIPURA,
represented by the Chief Secretary, Government of Tripura, New Capital
Complex, P.O. Agartala Secretariat, P.S.-New Capital Complex, Sub-Division-
Agartala, District- West Tripura, Pin- 799010
2.THE COMMISSIONER AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Finance Department, Government of Tripura, New Capital Complex, P.O.
Agartala Secretariat, P.S.-New Capital Complex, Sub-Division-Agartala,
District-West Tripura, Pin- 799010
3.THE SECRETARY,
Finance Department, Government of Tripura, New Capital Complex, P.O.
Agartala Secretariat, P.S. New Capital Complex, Sub-Division- Agartala,
District- West Tripura, Pin- 799010
4.THE SECRETARY,
Law Department, Government of Tripura, New Capital Complex, P.O. Agartala
Secretariat, P.S.-New Capital Complex, Sub-Division-Agartala, District West
Tripura, Pin- 799010
5.THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA,
represented by the Registrar General, Khejurbagan, P.O. Agartala Secretariat,
P.S.-New Capital Complex, Sub-Division-Agartala, District-West Tripura, Pin-
799010
6.THE REGISTRAR GENERAL,
The High Court of Tripura, Khejurbagan, P.O. Agartala Secretariat, P.S. New
Capital Complex, Sub-Division- Agartala, District-West Tripura, Pin-799010
7.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
West Tripura Judicial District, Court Complex Agartala, P.O. Agartala, P.S.
West Agartala, Sub-Division- Agartala, District- West Tripura, Pin-799001
8.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
Gomati Judicial District, Udaipur, P.O. and P.S. R.K. Pur, Sub-Division-
Udaipur, District- Gomati, Tripura, Pin-799120
9.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
South Tripura Judicial District, Belonia, P.O. and P.S. Belonia, Sub-Division-
Belonia, District-South Tripura, Pin- 799155
10.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
Page 2 of 6
Khowai Judicial District, Khowai Court Complex, P.O. and P.S. Khowai, Sub-
Division-Khowai, District-Khowai, Tripura, Pin-799201
11.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
Sepahijala Judicial District, Sonamura, P.O. and P.S. Sonamura, Sub- Division-
Sonamura, District Sepahijala, Tripura, Pin-799131
12.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
Unakoti Judicial District, Kailasahar Court Complex, P.O. and P.S. Kailasahar.
Sub-Division- Kailasahar, District- Unakoti, Tripura, Pin-799277
13.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
Dhalai Judicial District, Ambassa Court Complex, P.O. and P.S. Ambassa, Sub-
Division- Ambassa, District- Dhalai, Tripura, Pin-799204
14.THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
North Tripura Judicial District, Dharmanagar Court Complex, P.O. and P.S.
Dharmanagar, Sub-Division-Dharmanagar, District-North Tripura, Pin-799250
15.THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL(A and E),
Tripura, P.O.-Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura, Pin-
799006
..........Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, Advocate General.
Mr. Bibhal Nandi Majumder, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. D. Sharma, Addl. G.A.
Ms. Pinki Chakraborty, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Date of Hearing & Judgment : 12/02/2026
Whether fit for reporting : YES
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
(M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, C.J.)
The Petitioner is an Association of retired employees of the
District/Sub-ordinate judiciary.
2. They had previously approached this Court by filing
WP(C)No.420 of 2022 seeking (a) fixation of pension of the members of the
Petitioners Association in terms of benefit of 6th Central Pay Commission
recommendation and subsequent Central Pay Commission recommendation, (b)
payment of Gratuity as per Retired Central Government Employees and (c)
payment of Dearness relief on basis of Sixth Pay Commission recommendations.
3. The said Writ Petition had been disposed of on 02.05.2023
directing the Petitioner Association to make a representation to the respondents
and directed the respondents to take a decision within one month from the date
of receipt of representation.
4. Pursuant to the said direction, a representation was given on
27.09.2023 by the Petitioner Association which was disposed of on 16.01.2024
rejecting the claims made therein.
5. Challenging the same, the instant Writ Petition was filed.
6. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner prayed for the following:
"(i) Issue Rule calling upon the respondents and each one of them,
to show cause as to why a Writ of Certiorari and/or in the nature
thereof, shall not be issued for calling for the records, lying with the
officials respondents, for rendering substantial and conscionable
justice to the petitioner and quash/set-aside the Order No.F.No.3(2)-
FIN(PC)/97(P-III)/L/1188-90, dated Agartala, 16th January, 2024
(Annexure 14 infra);
(ii) Issue Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why
a Writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, for
mandating/directing the respondents to revoke/rescind the impugned
Order No.F.No.3(2)-FIN(PC)/97(P-III)/(L)/1188-90, dated Agartala,
16th January 2024 (Annexure 14 infra); and make fixation of
pension of the members of the Petitioners Association in terms of
benefit of 6th Central Pay Commission recommendation and
subsequent Central Pay Commission recommendation and pay the
Gratuity as per Retired Central Government Employees;
(iii) Pass an interim Order directing the respondents to pay the
members of the petitioner‟s association Dearness Relief as per 6 th
Central Pay Commission recommendation;
(iv) After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the Rules absolute
in terms of Prayers made in paragraphs (i) & (ii) above;
..."
7. The whole basis of the Writ Petition appears to be an order
passed by this Court in WP(C)No.617 of 2015, initially on 31.08.2016 which
was later modified with some respects by the Learned Single Judge on
11.04.2017 on an application filed by the State of Tripura to modify the same.
8. In that Writ Petition No.617 of 2015, the dispute was with regard
to in-service employees of the Sub-ordinate judiciary who were seeking revised
pay structure in terms of the 6th Central Pay Commission. Reliance was made in
the said Writ Petition on certain orders passed by the Supreme Court of India in
All India Judges' Association & Ors versus Union of India & Ors. initially
on 07.02.2009 and subsequently on 16.03.2015. The Supreme Court in the said
orders had directed implementation of the recommendations of the Justice
Jagannath Shetty Commission regarding pay revision and grant of allowances to
the in-service employees of the Sub-ordinate judiciary w.e.f.01.04.2003.
9. The Learned Single Judge held in that Writ Petition that financial
constraints cannot be considered as a tenable ground for denying benefits of the
recommendations of the Justice Jagannath Shetty Commission to employees of
Sub-ordinate judiciary; that Supreme Court directed a special package for
employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary for enhancing the efficiency in the judicial
administration , and the same had to be continued; and the revised pay structures
which are to be applied w.e.f.01.01.2006 have to be the revised pay structure as
recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission and by the future Central Pay
Commission. The State Government was directed to give revised structure to the
employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary on the pay structure given on the basis of
recommendation of the Justice Jagannath Shetty Commission w.e.f.01.01.2006
and the arrears by way of difference till 31.03.2016 were directed to be paid by
the State Government in lump sum or in four equal installments before
31.03.2017. Learned Single Judge also directed to release „other benefits‟ in
terms of the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations.
10. On a clarification sought by the State Government as to what is
the meaning of „other benefits‟, which term was used in the judgment dt.
31.08.2016, the learned single Judge in a subsequent order dt.11.4.2017 held that
the words „other benefits‟ would mean all such allowances and financial inputs,
approved and released by the Government of India for benefit of their employees
in the various grades. He rejected the plea of the State Government that
employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary would be entitled to various allowances „at
the rates and conditions‟ as applicable to the State Government employees in the
equivalent rank and it was declared that the pay package as declared by the
Justice Jagannath Shetty Commission had been consciously delinked from the
State pay scale for giving it a uniform and national character. It was clarified that
the term „other benefits‟ are delinked from the pay scales and so, allowances
which are extended to Central Government employees as per the 6th Central Pay
Commission recommendation should also be given to employees of the Sub-
ordinate judiciary.
11. In our opinion, the discussion in the judgment dt.31.8.2016 and
order dt.11.4.2017 in Writ Petition No.617 of 2015 was confined to in-service
employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary and there was no direction given with
regard to retired employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary, particularly in respect of
Pension, Dearness relief or Gratuity.
12. In the impugned order dt.16.01.2024 also, the State Government
has clarified that as far as retired employees are concerned, Rule 11 of the
District Courts‟ Ministerial Establishment (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2014 states that persons retired from Subordinate judiciary shall
be governed by Rules as are applicable to the persons holding equivalent posts
under the State Government with respect to matters like age of retirement,
pension, gratuity, leave salary and other benefits and entitlements on retirement;
and that retired employees of Sub-ordinate judiciary, not being employees of the
Central Government service, cannot seek dearness relief at the rate prescribed by
the Central Government for each employees. It was also clarified that the order
passed by this Court in WP(C)No.617 of 2015 relates to persons who are in the
service of Sub-ordinate judiciary and not persons who have retired from the Sub-
ordinate judiciary.
13. We agree with the reasoning in the impugned order and hold that
retired employees, who are governed by Rule 11 of the District Courts‟
Ministerial Establishment (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2014,
cannot seek benefits like pension and dearness relief on the 6th Central Pay
Commission recommendations, since they do not apply to employees who retired
from the Sub-ordinate judiciary of the State of Tripura and since they have not
retired from the Central Government Service.
14. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the said Writ Petition and
accordingly it is dismissed.
(BISWAJIT PALIT, J) (M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ)
SABYASACHI Digitally signed by
SABYASACHI
BHATTACHARJ BHATTACHARJEE
Date: 2026.02.19
EE 16:41:37 +05'30'
Sabyasachi B
