Shri Usha Ranjan Debbarma vs The State Of Tripura
2026 Latest Caselaw 648 Tri

Tripura High Court

Shri Usha Ranjan Debbarma vs The State Of Tripura on 17 February, 2026

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                        HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                              AGARTALA
                                  W.A. No.16 of 2024
Shri Usha Ranjan Debbarma,
S/O- Lt. Rabindra Debbarma,
Resident of Ujan Pathalia, P.S. Bishramganj,
District- Sepahijala, Tripura
                                                                ......... Appellant (s)
                                      VERSUS
1. The State of Tripura,
 represented by the Secretary to the Government of
Tripura, Department of Panchayat, New Secretariat,
P.O. & P.S.-New, Capital Complex, District:-West Tripura, 799010.

2. Director of Panchayat,
Government of Tripura, P.N. Complex,
Gurkhabasti, P.O.-Kunjaban, District:-West Tripura, 799006.

3. Shri Sukurai Debbarma,
S/O- Shri Sukramani Debbarma, Resident of
Joyram Modi Para, P.O.-Lefunga, Mohanpur, West Tripura.

4. Milan Chandra Tripura,
S/O-Late Shyampada Tripura, Resident of Vill.-Pachim Taka Tulshi,
P.O.-Taka Tulshi, Sabroom, Sabroom, South Tripura.

5. Radhakrishna Debbarma,
Hazamara, R.D Block, P.O.-Hazamara,
Hazamara, West Tripura.

6. Dipankar Debbarma,
S/O.-Late Kanti Ranjan Debbarma, Vill. & P.O.-
Jampuijala, Jampuijala, West Tripura.

7. Surajit Debbarma,
S/O-Shri Harinath Debbarma, Vill. & P.O.-Sutar Mura,
Bishalgarh, Shipahijala, Tripura

8. Malin Debbarma,
Mandai, R.D Block, P.O.-Mandai, Mandai, West
Tripura.
                                                                    ----Respondent(s)

      For the Appellant(s)               :     Mr. B.N. Majumder, Sr. Adv.
                                               Mr. S. Sarkar, Adv.
                                               Mr. A. Dasgupta, Adv.
      For the Respondent(s)              :     Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.

      Date of hearing                    :     11.02.2026
      Date of delivery of
      Judgment & Order                   :     17.02.2026
      Whether fit for reporting          :     Yes





                       BEFORE
        HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
                            JUDGMENT & ORDER


(Dr. T. Amarnath Goud, J)

The present writ appeal has been filed under Chapter-VIII,

Rule-B(A) of the High Court of Tripura Rules, 2023 read with Article-226

of the Constitution of India against the judgment and order dated

28.06.2023 passed in WP(C) No.11 of 2022 by the learned Single Judge.

2. The case of the writ petitioner, the appellant herein, in brief is

that initially he was appointed as a Panchayet Secretary on a fixed-pay

basis on 21.07.2003 and subsequently, he was absorbed permanently in the

year 2008. The petitioner applied for a 'No Objection' certificate in the

year 2010 for appearing in the Secondary Examination (Madhyamik)

conducted by the National Open School and accordingly, the 'No

Objection' certificate was issued by the Director of Panchayats,

Government of Tripura in favour of him on 08.11.2010 [Annexure-2 to the

writ petition] and after successfully passed the Madhyamik Examination,

the writ petitioner again approached the Block Development Officer

(BDO), Jampuijala R.D. Block for recording his Madhyamik Pass

qualification in his service book and accordingly, the BDO, Jampuijala

R.D. Block forwarded the said prayer to the Director of Panchayet, the

respondent No.2 herein, vide communication dated 26.08.2011

[Annexure-3 to the writ petition]. Thereafter, in the year 2013, the again

the writ petitioner applied for 'No Objection Certificate' for appearing in

the Senior Secondary Examination from National Institute of Open School

and accordingly, No Objection certificate was issued on 01.03.2013

[Annexure-4 to the writ petition] and after successfully passed the said

examination, he also made a similar prayer for recording the said

qualification before the Director of Panchayet through proper channel.

3. On 23.03.2016, the Director of Panchayet, Government of

Tripura published a draft seniority list in which the petitioner was

erroneously placed at Serial No. 950 and showing him as 'Madhyamik

plucked'. Upon detecting the said error, the writ petitioner submitted a

representation to respondent No.2 on 14.07.20166, requesting for

correction of his educational qualifications. However, till date no final

seniority list has been published.

4. In terms of the draft seniority list, the writ petitioner alleged

that Sri Sanjit Debbarma, Shri Radhakrishna Debbarma, Shri Milan

Chandra Tripura and Shri Sukurai Debbarma were shown as juniors while

Sri Dipankar Debbarma, Sri Malin Debbarma and Sri Surajit Debbarma,

who were Madhyamik plucked, were shown as his senior. The Director of

Panchayet vide order dated 06.01.2017 issued an order of promotion of 94

persons to the post of Supervisor (Panchayat) in the Pay Band-2 of

Rs.5700-24000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/-, but in the said promotion

order, the appellant's name was excluded for the said promotion list.

5. Thereafter, the writ petitioner submitted a representation

dated 04.03.2017 [Annexure-9 to the writ petition] to the Director of

Panchayat, Government of Tripura, praying for promotion to the said post

of Supervisor. However, no reply came from their end. Again, the writ

petitioner submitted a subsequent representation dated 17.06.2021 to the

Director of Panchayet seeking equal treatment but this also remained

pending.

6. According to the appellant, in view of the notification of the

Education (Higher) Department, Government of Tripura took a policy that

the certificate obtained from off-campus study centre other than the State

Private Universities/Deemed Universities would not be treated as valid for

any service benefits w.e.f. 10.07.2013. The said policy was clarified by the

Tripura Board of Secondary Education vide notification dated 03.08.2016.

The writ petitioner states that as per the recruitment rules, the post of

Auditor would be filled up 50% from the employees having 5 years

experience in the post of Panchayat Secretary having 10 years experience

with educational qualification as Matriculate. He also states that despite

sufficient vacancies in the post of Auditor, only 8 Nos. of graduate and 2

Nos. of Madhyamik pass employees were promoted by the promotion

order of 2017. Subsequently, a new draft seniority list was again published

on 04.08.2021 [Annexure-11 to the writ petition].

7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order of promotion

dated 06.01.2017, the writ petitioner had filed the writ petition being

W.P.(C) No.11 of 2022 seeking promotion to the post of Supervisor

(Panchayat/Auditor) w.e.f. 06.01.2017. The writ petitioner also sought for

extension of all consequential service benefits including arrears from the

date of said promotion order. Accordingly, on 28.06.2023, the learned

Single Judge allowed the said writ petition observing as under:

In such circumstances, in order to remedy the injustice caused to the petitioner, the respondent No.2, the Director of Panchayat, Government of Tripura, is directed to examine the case of the petitioner in the background of the admitted facts and restore his seniority to the correct place in the draft seniority list published on

14.07.2016 if the petitioner was left out of the seniority list without any fault of his. Since the respondents-State have taken a plea that all the vacancies were filled up in the promotional exercise held on 27.12.2016 vide notification dated 06.01.2017 from the undergraduate quota to which the petitioner belongs, the respondents would consider the case of the petitioner for promotion from the due date by creating a supernumerary post. The petitioner, if found fit and eligible on all aspects, shall be conferred promotion with effect from the date of notification, i.e. 06.01.2017 with consequential seniority.

However, the petitioner shall be entitled to salary in the promotional post from the date on which he actually joins the post.

Needless to say, on promotion of the petitioner to the next higher post against the available vacancy in his quota, the supernumerary post shall cease to exist thereafter.

8. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and

Order dated 28.06.2023 passed in WP(C) No.11 of 2022, the writ

petitioner preferred this instant appeal.

9. Mr. B.N. Majumder, learned senior counsel appearing for the

writ petitioner-appellant submits that during his period of service, the writ

petitioner-appellant passed the Madhyamik examination as well as Senior

Secondary examination after obtaining the necessary no objection

certificate from the concerned department but in spite of his prayers, his

qualifications were not recorded in the service book. Consequently, he was

shown in a lower category and his juniors were shown in the higher

position in the draft seniority list. Since his qualifications were not

recorded in the service book, he was not considered for promotion to the

post of Supervisor (Panchayat). Thereafter, the writ petitioner-appellant

submitted the representations dated 04.03.2017 and 17.06.2021 to the

respondent No.2 seeking promotion to the post of Supervisor/Auditor. Mr.

Majumder, learned senior counsel further submits that by the

memorandum dated 04.08.2021, the writ petitioner-appellant's educational

qualification shown as SSSE passed but nothing has been changed in the

seniority list. Learned senior counsel also submits that the writ petitioner-

appellant was not at fault to intimate the appropriate authority regarding

recording his educational qualifications.

10. To buttress his contention, Mr. Majumder, leaned senior

counsel relies on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

K. Samba Moorthy vs. Sanjiv Chadha, reported in 2025 STPL 1246.

11. From the other side, Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A.

appearing for the State-respondents, submits that the issues which are now

challenged in this appeal, already discussed and decided by the learned

Single Judge while passing the judgment dated 28.06.2023 in W.P(C)

No.11 of 2022. Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. further submits that in

compliance of the said judgment of the learned Single Judge, the Director

of Panchayet, Government of Tripura, issued an order dated 20.12.2023,

directing that the writ petitioner shall be conferred promotion for the post

of Supervisor (Panchayets) (Group-C, Non-Gazetted) with effect from the

date of notification i.e. 06.01.2017 with consequential seniority and the

writ petitioner-appellant shall be entitled to salary in promotional post

from the date on which he actually joins the post. The writ petitioner-

appellant gladly accepted the said order of promotion and joined to the

said post of Supervisor (Panchayat) without filing any objection.

Therefore, Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. submits that this writ appeal

is not maintainable and accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the same.

12. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned

counsel appearing for the parties and also meticulously gone through the

records. It appears from the records that the writ petitioner-appellant

submitted a representation to the Director of Panchayats on 14.07.2016

seeking incorporation of his secondary and senior secondary qualifications

in the draft seniority list. However, the said draft seniority list had been

published by the Director of Panchayats, Government of Tripura vide

memorandum on 23.03.2016, well before of his submission of

representation. The writ petitioner-appellant even did not file any

subsequent objection against the draft seniority list. The writ petitioner-

appellant has joined the said post of Supervisor (Panchayat) in the year

2023 after passing of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. He did not

even file any objection against the said draft seniority list and the

promotional order to the post of Supervisor (Panchayet). The writ

petitioner-appellant has also failed to establish sufficient grounds for

seeking further relief against the judgment of learned Single Judge. More

so, the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of K. Samba Moorthy (supra)

as relied upon by Mr. Majumder, learned senior counsel appearing for the

writ petitioner-appellant is not applicable in the present case in hand.

13. In view of the above, we find no merit in this appeal and

accordingly it is dismissed. The writ petitioner-appellant has no legitimate

claim for retrospective pay and allowances based on the principle of 'no

work no pay.' Since the writ petitioner-appellant did not perform the duties

of the promotional post until 2023, he is entitled to financial benefits only

from the date of his joining to the post of Supervisor (Panchayat).

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

                  S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J                      DR.T. AMARNATH GOUD, J

  Sujay


SUJAY GHOSH Digitally signed by SUJAY GHOSH
            Date: 2026.02.17 17:05:17 +05'30'