1 3
Page of
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.405 of 2024
Sri Jiban Chandra Das,
W/o-Sri Prabhat Chandra Das, R/o-East Howaibari, P.O.-Howaibari, P.S.-
Teliamura, District-Khowai, Pin-799205, Age-42 years.
….Petitioner(s)
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-799001.
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. A. Bhaumik, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, GA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
Order
30/11/2024
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
th
why the memorandum dated 6 July, 2011 issued by the
Finance Department, Government of Tripura shall not be set
aside and quashed.
AND
2 3
Page of
Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to
why the Petitioner shall not be granted all financial benefits as
th
per the Judgment and order dated 19 March, 2021 passed in
W.P.(C) No.703/20
19 by this Hon’ble High Court as upheld by
the Ld. Division Bench in W.A. No.207/2021 as well as
judgment and order dated 23.11.2022 passed in W.P.(C)
No.469/2021 (Annexure 10 to the Writ Petition).
AND
(iv) And after hearing the parties, be pleased to make the rule
absolute.”
2. Heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, learned GA
appearing for the respondents-State.
3. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed as Post Graduate
Teacher in Political Science on 15.07.2010.Thereafter, he was on fixed pay
for a period of 5(five) years of his service. On completion of 5(five) years on
fixed pay, the petitioner was given the benefit of regular pay scale. At the
time of his initial appointment as Post Graduate Teacher, the petitioner had
the degree of B.Ed. which was a qualification higher than the entry level
qualification for the post in question. It is the grievance of the petitioner that
having entered into service as Post Graduate Teacher with B.Ed. degree, his
service is covered under Rule 13(1)(ii) of the Tripura States Civil Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and accordingly, he is entitled to one advance
increment, which was denied to him. Hence, the present writ petition.
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).
5. This proposition has not been opposed by learned GA appearing
for the respondents-State.
3 3
Page of
6. I 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.
”
7. Since the factual aspects of the present writ petition is similar
and identical to the subject matter of the case of Kamanashis Das(supra),
the present writ petition is also, therefore, allowed and disposed of in the
same terms.
8. The respondents are directed to pay one advance increment and
other financial benefits to the petitioner in line with the directions given in
Kamanashis Das(supra).
9. The entire process shall be completed within a period of 4(four)
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. With the above observation and directions, the instant writ
petition stands disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed.
JUDGE
Snigdha
SANJAY
Digitally signed by
SANJAY GHOSH
GHOSH Date: 2024.11.30
15:51:20 +05'30'