Allowed

Tapan Das v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Tripura HC5 Jun 2017WP(C)/55/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment consolidates six writ petitions challenging the regularization of retired contingent/DRW workers of TSECL. The court held that while regularization applies from 01.07.2008, arrears are denied due to financial constraints, and effective reporting is fixed as 27.12.2010.

What did the court decide?

Regularization w.e.f. 01.07.2008 without arrears; effective reporting date fixed at 27.12.2010; Corporation to pay arrears for short period with interest.

Tapan Das Vs the State of Tripura and Ors. — Service and Employment | Tripura HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA

¶3

WP(C)1096 OF 2016 WP(C)1097 OF 2016 WP(C)1098 OF 2016 WP(C)1253 OF 2016 WP(C)54 OF 2017 WP(C)55 OF 2017

¶4

WP(C)1096 OF 2016

¶5

Sri Ranjit Chandra Das , son of late Dinesh Chandra Das, presently posted as Helper Grade-II, Office of the Senior Manager, Boxanagar Electrical Sub-Division, Sonamura, District: Sipahijala, resident of village-Kalshimura, P.O. Rokhia, P.S. Kalamchowra, District: Sipahijala, Pin 799 102

¶6

…. Petitioner

¶7

- Vs –

¶8

1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶9

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶10

3. The Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, (A Government of Tripura Enterprise) represented by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, having its Head Office at Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District:West Tripura, Pin-799 001

¶11

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶12

…. Respondents

¶13

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. T. Dutta Majumder, G.A. For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶14

Page 1 of 16

¶15

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶16

¶17

WP(C)1097 OF 2016

¶18

Sri Ranjit Das , son of late Hiralal Das, presently posted as MRCBC, Office of the Senior Manager, Nalchar Electrical Sub-Division, Sonamura, District: Sipahijala, resident of village-Kariadhepa, P.O. Rudijala, P.S. Melaghar, District: Sipahijala, Pin 799 115

¶19

…. Petitioner

¶20

- Vs –

¶21

1. The State of Tripura,

¶22

represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶23

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶24

¶25

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶26

…. Respondents

¶27

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. A.S.Lodh, Addl. G.A. For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶28

Page 2 of 16

¶29

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶30

¶31

WP(C)1098 OF 2016

¶32

Sri Dhirendra Reang , son of Sri Daitarai Reang, presently posted as MRCBC, Office of the Senior Manager, Jolaibari Electrical Sub-Division, South Tripura, resident of village-Kalma, P.O. Muhuripura, P.S. Baikhora, District: South Tripura, Pin 799 141

¶33

…. Petitioner

¶34

- Vs –

¶35

1. The State of Tripura,

¶36

represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶37

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006.

¶38

¶39

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶40

…. Respondents

¶41

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. A.S.Lodh, Addl. G.A. For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶42

Page 3 of 16

¶43

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶44

¶45

WP(C)1253 OF 2016

¶46

Smt. Swapna Bala Das , wife of Sankar Chandra Das, presently posted as MRCBC, Office of the Senior Manager, Sonamura Electrical Sub-Division, District:Sipahijala, resident of village-Durgapur, P.O. & P.S. Sonamura, District: Sipahijala, Pin 799 181

¶47

…. Petitioner

¶48

- Vs –

¶49

1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶50

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶51

¶52

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶53

…. Respondents

¶54

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate

¶55

For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. A.S.Lodh, Addl. G.A.

¶56

For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶57

Page 4 of 16

¶58

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶59

¶60

WP(C)54 OF 2017

¶61

Sri Parimal Das , son of Sri Kula Chand Das, presently posted as Gr.II-Helper, Office of the Senior Manager, 66 KV Sub Station, Rabindranagar, Sonamura, District:Sipahijala, resident of village-Ward No.2, Lichubagan, Near Sarojini School, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin 799 006

¶62

…. Petitioner

¶63

Vs –

¶64

1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶65

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶66

¶67

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶68

…. Respondents

¶69

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. A.S.Lodh, Addl. G.A. For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶70

Page 5 of 16

¶71

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶72

¶73

WP(C) 55 OF 2017

¶74

Sri Tapan Das , son of late Sital Ch. Das, presently posted as MRCBC, Office of the Senior Manager, Electrical Sub-Division, Boxanagar, District:Sipahijala, resident of village-Manikyanagar, P.O. Rokhia, P.S. Kalamchowra, Sub-Division: Sonamura, District: Sipahijala, Pin 799 102

¶75

…. Petitioner

¶76

- Vs –

¶77

1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶78

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat Complex, Khejur Bagan, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S.New Capital Complex, District: West Tripura, Pin-799 006

¶79

¶80

4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited, Tripura, Bidyut Bhavan, North Banamalipur, Agartala, District: West Tripura,Pin-799 001

¶81

…. Respondents

¶82

For the petitioner : Mr. T.K. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. A.S.Lodh, Addl. G.A. For the respondents No.3 & 4 : Mr. P. Chakraborty, Advocate

¶83

Page 6 of 16

¶84

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶85

¶86

BEFORE

¶87

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA

¶88

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order. : 05.06.2017

¶89

Whether fit for reporting : Yes

¶90

JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL)

¶91

All these writ petitions being WP(C) No.1096/2016 [Sri Ranjit Chandra Das Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors.], WP(C) No. 1097/2016 [Sri Ranjit Das Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors.], WP(C) No.1098/2016 [Sri Dhirendra Reang Vrs. the State Tripura & Ors.], WP(C) No.1253/2016 [Smt. Swapna Bala Das Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors.], WP(C) No.54/2017 [Sri Parimal Das Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors.] and WP(C) No.55/2017 [Sri Tapan Das Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors.] are consolidated for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch as the controversy in these writ petitions is entirely identical in nature. Moreover, it has been contended that these writ petitions are wholly covered by a previous decision of this court in Sri Pradipta Kumar Goswami Vrs. the State of Tripura & Ors. [judgment and order dated 29.06.2015 delivered in WP(C) No.505 of 2011].

¶92

2. By means of these writ petitions the petitioners have urged that their regularization be directed in terms of the Memorandum under No.F.6(151)-TSECL/05/Pt-2/36421-36670 dated 27.12.2010 [Annexure-4 to the writ petitions]. Further it has been contended that the action of the respondents is grossly oppressive and in violation of the very scheme of regularization.

¶93

Page 7 of 16

¶94

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶95

¶96

For pairing the reliefs as sought, the petitioners have challenged the appointment order under No.F.6(151)-TSECL/05/Pt-2/9144391 dated 02.04.2011 [Annexure-5 to the writ petitions]. The petitioners filed a representation dated 16.08.2016 [Annexure-6 to the writ petition. Reference has been made to the writ petition being WP(C) No.1096 of 2016] to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd. [TSECL] by pressing that the petitioners shall be allowed the benefits of the regular scale w.e.f. 01.12.2007 in the scale of pay of Rs.453013,000/- [pay band-1 with Grade-pay of Rs.1200] with other admissible allowances in the manner as was extended to the DRWs/similarly situated persons when they were so regularized. The said representation was followed by another representation having the same content. But no positive result had surfaced in response to the said representation dated 16.08.2016. In support of that demand the petitioners had referred to the office order No.F.1(16)/Power/2007 dated 11.01.2008 [Annexure-11 to the writ petition] where 6(six) DRW/Contingent workers were regularized in the scale of pay of Rs.3300-7100/- w.e.f. 01.01.2007. According to the petitioners, the DRWs/Contingent workers got all the benefits as per the scheme adopted by the State Govt. as well as by the TSECL. The petitioners have further referred to an answer given by the Hon’ble Minister in-charge of the Finance Department in the Assembly, the transcript of which is available as Annexure-14 to the writ petition. In reply to a question whether Contingent workers who have served for 10 years are regularized, the Minister, Finance Department replied that those

¶97

Page 8 of 16

¶98

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016

¶99

WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶100

¶101

contingent and DRW workers were working in the TSECL for more than 10 years, they are being considered for regularization and they are brought to the regular pay scale. From the authenticated particulars of workers working in the TSECL, the rectified data base for purpose of regularization subject to compliance of the terms and conditions communicated by the memorandum under No.F.10(2)-FIN(G)/2008(Part) dated 09.06.2009 [Annexure-2 to the writ petitions], it would be apparent that the petitioner namely Sri Ranjit Ch. Das in WP(C) No.1096/2016 was engaged as the DRW on 08.07.1992 whereas, the petitioner namely Sri Tapan Das in WP(C) No.55/2017 was engaged as the DRW on 16.08.1993. The petitioner namely Smt. Swapna Bala Das in WP(C) No.1253/2016 was engaged as Contingent worker on 25.03.2000, the petitioner namely Sri Ranjit Das in WP(C) No.1097/2016 was engaged as Contingent worker on 08.11.2000, the petitioner namely Sri Dhirendra Reang in WP(C) No.1098/2016 was engaged as Contingent worker on 01.01.2001 and the petitioner namely Sri Parimal Das in WP(C) No.54/2017 was engaged as the DRW on 16.10.1997. As stated earlier all the writ petitioners were given appointment order dated 02.04.2011 based on the said data base. But the regularization was not given effect on completion of their 10 years of service as the Contingent/DRWs. There is no dispute that the memorandum No.F.10(2)-FIN(G)/2008(Part)/275 dated 09.06.2009 contains the following provisions:

¶102

“a) The first communication containing names and particulars of 68 workers stated to have completed minimum 17 years of service upto 31.3.2005 was issued vide memo No.F.10(2)FIN(G)/2005 dt.04-03-2006 for their

¶103

Page 9 of 16

¶104

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶105

¶106

regularization w.e.f. 01-02-2006 subject to verification of all records and particulars.

¶107

b) The 2^nd communication containing names and particulars of 325 workers stated to have completed minimum 15 years of service upto 31.3.2006 was issued vide memo No.F.10(2)FIN(G)/2005 dt.22.02.2007 for their regularization w.e.f. 01-01-2007 subject to verification of all records and particulars.

¶108

c) The 3^rd communication containing names and particulars of 241 workers all belonging to ST & SC communities and stated to have been engaged on or before 31.3.2003 was issued vide memo No.F.10(2)-FIN(G)/2005 dt. 14.03.2008 for their regularization w.e.f. 01-12-2007 subject to verification of all records and particulars.”

¶109

[ Emphasis added ]

¶110

3. There cannot be any amount of dispute that the petitioners are all conformed to the said conditions particularly what has been provided in Para ‘c’ of the memorandum dated 09.06.2009. As such, according to the policy, they were entitled to get the benefits of regularization w.e.f. 01.12.2007 but they were not regularized, in that manner. On the contrary, the petitioners have been sought to be regularized by the memorandum dated 27.12.2010 which is an offer of appointment [Annexure-4 to the writ petitions]. In terms of the said offer of appointment the petitioners were appointed by the appointment order dated 02.04.2011 showing them regularized from the date of joining to the post on regular basis. The said regularization was treated prospectively and as such the petitioners were not given the effect from an anterior date by the appointment order dated 02.04.2011. Therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking the relief as stated above.

¶111

Page 10 of 16

¶112

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶113

¶114

4. The respondents have not filed any reply rather the respondents have conceded that these cases are covered by the decision in Pradipta Kumar Goswami Vrs. the State of Tripura

¶115

& Ors. [judgment and order dated 29.06.2015 in WP(C) 505 of 2011]. The earlier writ petition was filed by similarly circumstanced persons who were working as Contingent worker/DRWs engaged on full time basis. In that case also though they are entitled to benefit w.e.f. 01.07.2010 but they are not given the effect of regularization with that day i.e. 01.07.2010.

¶116

This Court in Pradipta Kumar Goswami (supra) has

¶117

observed as under:

¶118

"[4] Pursuant to those offers of appointment dated 27.12.2010, their posting were given by the purported appointment order dated 02.04.2011 where it has been provided that – ‘the aforesaid regularization will be effective from the date of joining to the post on the regular basis. They should join at the respective places of posting by 11^th April, 2011’. Such abrupt change in the effective day of regularization has found its root in the communication dated 01.04.2011, Annexure-I to the writ petition, which has given rise to the cause for filing this writ petition. For reference, the communication dated 01.04.2011 is reproduced hereunder :

¶119

“I am directed to refer Memo No.F.3(2)FIN(G)/2008/P/275 dated 19^th June, 2009 of Finance Department, Government of Tripura communicating approval for regularization of DRWs/Casual/Contingent workers engaged on full time basis by erstwhile Power Department (now TSECL) and to say that Government has decided to regularize the DRWs/Casual/Contingent workers of TSECL from the date of joining to the post on regular basis.

¶120

2. This is in modification of date of effect of regularization issued by Finance Department under aforesaid Memo and issued with the approval of Council of Ministers vide Item No. 9 in its meeting held on 31^st March, 2011.”

¶121

Page 11 of 16

¶122

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶123

¶124

[5] Mr. T.K. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the said communication dated 01.04.2011 is entirely unsustainable, inasmuch as this communication comes in conflict with the memorandum dated 09.06.2009. Apart that, the person who has issued the said communication has no authority to make such change. He has succinctly submitted that all the petitioners since were eligible under the memorandum dated 09.06.2009, they are all entitled to be brought under the regular establishment with effect from 01.07.2008. He has fervently urged this Court, to direct the respondent-Corporation to release all the financial benefits accordingly.

¶125

[6] From the other side, Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation, has submitted that the Corporation is wading through the serious financial situation and as such even though the petitioners, in view of the memorandum dated 09.06.2009 were entitled to be brought under the regular establishment w.e.f. 01.07.2008, they were not in a position to bear the burden of additional financial requirement for defraying the arrear pay and allowances. Accordingly, for financial assistance, they had approached the Govt. of Tripura in the Power Department. In turn, the Power Department had processed the proposal to the Finance Department, Government of Tripura, which had regretted such financial assistance. At the instance of the Power Department, the matter was placed before the Council of Ministers for finding out an effective resolution. The Council of Ministers in its meeting dated 31.03.2011 has resolved as under:

¶126

Item No.9 : Fixing date of effect of financial benefit to the DRWs/ Casual/ Contingent workers of TSECL by notional fixation from the date of order of regularization under power Department. (Power Deptt. File No.F.1(17)/POWER/2007/P-I/2289 dated 30.03.11).

¶127

Proposal of the Department at para-5 of the cabinet memorandum is approved.”

¶128

[7] For purpose of understanding the decision of the Council of Ministers, the proposal of the Power Department as reflected in the Memorandum for Council of Ministers dated 30.03.2011 (Annexure-R/3 to the supplementary affidavit filed by the Corporation-respondents on 29.06.2015), is extracted as a whole :

¶129

Page 12 of 16

¶130

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶131

¶132

MEMORANDUM FOR COUNCIL OF MINISTERS.

¶133

Subject :- Fixing date of effect of financial benefit to the DRWs/Causal/ Contingent workers of TSECL by notional fixation from the date of order of regularization.

¶134

Finance Department, Government of Tripura vide its Memo No.F.3(2)FIN(G)/2008/P/275 dated 19^th June, 2009 communicated approval for regularization of DRWs/ Casual/ Contingent workers engaged on full time basis by erstwhile Power Department (now TSECL). The memorandum contains the details of name of 943 workers in 5(five) Annexures with different dates of effect of regularization, which is as follows :

¶135

*Annexure*	*No. of*	*Date of effect of*
	*Workers*	*regularization*
1	57	*01.02.2006*
2	*286*	*01.01.2007*
3	*228*	*01.12.2007*
4	*164*	*01.07.2008*
5	*208*	*31.03.2008*
	*943*

¶136

2. Government of Tripura has decided that all these DRWs/Casual/Contingent workers will be regularized by Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited (TSECL). Accordingly, TSECL has made verification of age, educational qualification and other criteria as per relevant recruitment rules and found 646 (six hundred forty six) candidates eligible for regularization with different date of effect as given by Finance Department as follows:-

¶137

	D *01.02.2006*	*ATE OF EFFEC* *01.01.2007*	*T OF REGULA* *01.12.2007*	*RIZATION* *01.07.2008*	*31.03.2008*	*Total*
_Group-C _	12	62	50	36	45	*205*
*Group-D*	27	*133*	_107 _	77	_97 _	*441*
*Total*	39	*195*	*157*	*113*	*142*	*646*

¶138

3. Out of 646 persons, TSECL has recently issued offer of appointment on regular basis to 388 persons in total, comprising of 240 workers to the post of Helper Gr-II, 13 workers to the post

¶139

Page 13 of 16

¶140

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶141

¶142

of Junior Operator and 135 workers to the post of MRCBC for the first phase. There joining will be accepted based on their accepting the offer.

¶143

4. Total financial additional implication for regularization of aforesaid workers is Rs.3.97 crores per annum. If regularization is to be made as per date of effect given by the Finance Department, arrear payment of Rs.8.50 crores will be involved. TSECL is willing to bear the responsibility for future financial liabilities consequent to regularization but has expressed inability to bear the burden of arrear payment. A proposal was moved to Finance Department for sanction of arrears to aforesaid workers, but Finance Department regretted the proposal due to financial constraints vide U.O. No.965FIN(B)/2010 dated 31.01.2001.

¶144

5. Keeping in view the above, approval of Council of Ministers is sought for regularization of DRWs in TSECL from the date of their joining, in modification of the dates mentioned in para 1 of this memo, with prospective effect and subject to the condition that no arrear payment will be made owing to financial constraints on the part of TSECL.

¶145

6. Hon'ble Chief Minister has given his consent to place the matter before the Council of Ministers.

¶146

Sd/- illegible 30/3

¶147

(MANISH KUMAR) Secretary, Power Government of Tripura.

¶148

[8] From the para 5 of the proposal, it clearly transpires, as Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned counsel for the Corporation has indicated that the proposal was to give the regularization from a prospective date to avoid the arrear payment. But, there is no specific proposal whether the very date as indicated in the memorandum dated 09.06.2009 would be modified or not. The purpose of this proposal was to get rid of the arrear payment to the persons who were entitled to be regularized w.e.f. 01.07.2008 or from some other anterior or posterior day, the said proposal has been accepted by the Council of Ministers. However, formal notification in this regard is yet to be issued.

¶149

Page 14 of 16

¶150

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶151

¶152

[9] Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 2 and 3, has also supported the plea raised by Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation and he has produced the original file from where that proposal was initiated.

¶153

[10] This is really unfortunate that the persons who are working in the Corporation and who have worked in the Power Department for a considerable long term, will not be getting the benefit of the memorandum dated 09.06.2009 as the necessary fund is not available with the Corporation. It has not been disputed by the respondents that this memorandum has been implemented in the other Departments, effectively bringing the similarly situated persons on the regular establishment w.e.f. 01.07.2008. Since these unfortunate workers have been working in the Corporation, they are now at the mercy of the Corporation. From examination of the records so produced, this court also cannot disagree with the assessment that the corporation is reeling under serious crunch of fund and on financial matters this court cannot direct the Corporation to adopt any pay structure or regularisation if that is not possible within their means. But, the rigid attitude of the Corporation at the same time cannot be subscribed by this court. As a result, the decision contained in the communication dated 01.04.2011 is interfered with, inasmuch as this is not consistent with the decision of the Council of Ministers at all and the respondents could not show any other basis of issuing such communication. What the Council of Ministers has decided in their meeting dated 31.03.2011 is that the financial benefit may not be given with effect from 01.07.2008, but from their date of regularization. There again emerges another issue. What would be the effective date of regularization? The Council of Ministers is silent over that aspect of the matter. If the memorandum dated 09.06.2009 and the decision of the Council of Ministers dated 31.03.2011 are read together, only interpretation that can possibly be gathered is that the petitioners will be regularized w.e.f. 01.07.2008, but they will not get the financial benefit from that date. It has not been denied by the respondents that the offer of appointment that was issued on 27.12.2010 has been accepted by all the petitioners, but under protest.

¶154

[11] It is expected that without raising any further reservation, the Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd. shall treat the day of issuing offers of appointment i.e. 27.12.2010 as the effective date of reporting of the petitioners in the

¶155

Page 15 of 16

¶156

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016

¶157

WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

¶158

¶159

regular post, even though their posting was given by the appointment order dated 02.04.2011, Annexure-5 to the writ petition.”

¶160

5. As there is no more disputes that the decision in Pradipta Kumar Goswami (supra) entirely covers these batch of writ petitions, this court is of the view that these batch of writ petitions can be disposed of in similar terms.

¶161

6. The respondents are directed to fix the pay of the petitioners in the scale of pay that has been denoted in the memorandum dated 27.12.2010 [Annexure-4 to the writ petition], w.e.f. 01.07.2008 for those writ petitioners who had completed 10(ten) years service before 31.03.2008, but even those petitioners will not get the financial benefit till 26.12.2010. From 27.12.2010 all the petitioners would get the financial benefits as the regular employees [Helper Grade II and MRCBC] of the Corporation. As a result, the Corporation shall pay the arrear pay and allowances to the petitioners for a period, somewhat more than 3(three) months only. The said arrear shall be paid to the petitioners within 3(three) months from the day when the copy of this order shall be furnished by the petitioners to the respondent No.4, else the said amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum till the payment is made.

¶162

With this observation and direction, these writ petitions are allowed to the extent as indicated above.

¶163

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶164

JUDGE

¶165

Page 16 of 16

¶166

WP(C) 1096/2016, WP(C) 1097/2016, WP(C) 1098/2016, WP(C) 1253/2016 WP(C) 54/2017, WP(C) 55/2017

Tapan Das v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapan Das v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monoranjan Debnath Vs The State Of Tripura and Ors.

Gopal Debnath Vs The State Of Tripura and Ors.

Dilip Kr. Bhowmik Vs T.R.T.C. and Anr.

State Of Tripura And 2 Ors. Vs Gopal Ch. Das And Another

Dipak Bhattacharjee Vs F.C.I and Ors.

Parimal Das Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.