Smt. Ripa Sarma v. The State of Tripura and 2 Others

Order

24/05/2024

By means of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: "(i) Issue notice upon the Respondents.

(ii) Call for the Records.

(iii) Issue rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be given the benefit of one increment as per Rule 13(1)(ii) of the Tripura States Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 alongwith arrears of financial benefit. AND Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the memorandum dated 6th July, 2011 issued by the Finance

Department, Government of Tripura shall not be set aside and quashed. AND Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the memorandum dated 6th July,2011 issued by the Finance Department, Government of Tripura shall not be set aside and quashed. AND Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be granted all financial benefits as per the Judgment and order dated 19th March,2021 passed in WP(C) No.703/2019 by this Hon'ble High Court as upheld by the Ld. Division Bench in W.A. No.207/2021 and the Judgment and order dated 31.07.2023 passed in Review Petition No.21/2023 and Review Petition No.24/2023 by the Hon'ble High Court. IV.And after hearing the parties, be pleased to make the rule absolute.

2.

Heard Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs R. Chakraborty, learned cousel appearing for the respondents-State.

3.

Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in B.Sc (Pure) under the respondents vide offer of appointment dated 29.03.2012 on fixed pay basis for a period of 5(five) years. Thereafter, on completion of 5(five) years of service on fixed pay, the petitioner was given the benefit of regular pay scale. At the time of her initial appointment as Assistant Teacher, the petitioner had acquired the degree of B.Ed. which was a higher qualification than that of the entry level qualification for the post in question. It is the grievance of the petitioner that having entered into service as Assistant Teacher with B.Ed. degree, her service is covered under Rule 13(1)(ii) of the Tripura States Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and accordingly, she is

entitled to one advance increment, which was denied to her. Hence, the present writ petition.

4.

At the very outset, Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition is well covered by the judgment and order of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 695 of 2023 titled as Smt. Subhra Debnath Vrs. The State of Tripura & 2 Ors. This proposition has not been opposed by Mrs. R. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

5.

I have gone through the aforesaid judgment. The relevant portion of the said judgment made at paras 4, 5 and 6 may be reproduced here-in-below: "4. At the very outset, Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present writ petition is well covered by the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge (A. Kureshi, CJ, as he then was) of this Court dated 19.03.2021 passed in WP(C) No.703 of 2019 titled as Sri Kamanashis Das & Ors. vs. The State of Tripura & Ors. Against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, the State has preferred an appeal which has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in WA No.207 of 2021, titled as State of Tripura & Ors. vs. Kamanashis Das & Ors. Learned counsel, therefore, prayed for disposing the present writ petition in terms of the directions passed in Kamanashis Das(supra) & Smt. Subhra Debnath (supra).

¶5This proposition has not been opposed by learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents.

¶6I have gone through the aforesaid judgment passed by learned Single Judge in Kamanashis Das(supra). The relevant portion of the said judgment may be reproduced here-in-below: "16. In the result, it is provided that all the petitioners would be entitled to one advance increment in terms of Rule 13(1)(ii) of ROP 2009 from the respective dates when they were brought over to regular pay scales. This pay fixation would, however, be for notional purpose till the date of filing

of the petition after which they would be entitled to arrears of salary. These directions shall be carried out within a period of 4(four) months from today.

Petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of."

6.

Since the factual aspects of the present writ petition is similar and identical to the subject matter of the case of Smt. Subhra Debnath (supra), the present writ petition is, therefore, allowed and disposed of in the same terms.

7.

The respondents are directed to pay one advance increment and other financial benefits in line with the directions given in Smt. Subhra Debnath (supra).

8.

The entire process shall be completed within a period of 4(four) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9.

With the above observation and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

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

JUDGE

Sanjay SANJAY GHOSH Date: 2024.05.24 17:43:16 +05'30'

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) 755 OF 2023 Smt. Ripa Sarma, W/o Sri Bipul Ranjan De, R/o Vill Padmerpar,P.O. Paiturbazar, P.S. Kailasahar, District- Unakoti, Pin-799279. ….Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Tripura, represented by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Secretariat, P.S. New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura, Pin-799010. 2. The Director of Secondary Education, Directorate of Secondary Education, School Education Department, Government of Tripura, P.O. Agartala, P.S.West Agartala, District-West Tripura, Pin-79901. 3. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Tripura,P.O. Secretariat, P.S. New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura,Pin-799010. ….Respondent(s) For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Dey, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. Riya Chakraborty, Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH