Smt. Anjali Biswas v. The State of Tripura and 5 others
Court: High Court of Tripura
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Tripura judgment dated 2024-11-13. Smt. Anjali Biswas v. The State of Tripura and 5 others. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) NO. 684 OF 2024 Smt. Anjali Biswas The State of Tripura and ors. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD : Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate. Mr. D. Paul, Advocate. Mr. S. C. Majumder, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, Deputy SGI. Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G. A. Order This present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: “i) Issue rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order or direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent to record service rendered by the Petitioner as Anganwadi Worker before joining as Supervisor (ICDS) (Group-C. Non Gazetted), in the Service Book of the Petitioner.
ii) Issue rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order or direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent to send pension proposal of the Petitioner to the AG(A & E), Tripura after retirement of the Petitioner from service on superannuation on the basis of 50% service as Anganwadi Worker and regular service as Supervisor (ICDS) (Group-C, Non Gazetted). iii) Issue rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order or direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent to determine the Gratuity, Leave Encashment and other pensionary benefits оп retirement of the Petitioner on the basis of the 50% of service rendered by the Petitioner as Anganwadi Worker and regular service in the post of Supervisor, ICDS (Group-C, Non Gazetted).
iv) Issue rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order or direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent to modify the Notification, dated, 02. 06. 2023, issued by the Director, Social Welfare and Social Education by deleting the word "on ad-hoc basis". v) Make the Rules absolute, vi) Call for records………. ” [2] It is the case of the petitioner that she is entitled for retirement benefits and the same has not been considered by the respondents. Accordingly, she made several representations before th the concerned respondent(s) and the latest one was made on 9 May, 2024. [3] Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel and Mr. S. C. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G. A. appearing for the State respondents and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI appearing on behalf of respondent-Union of India.
[4] Upon hearing the submissions made at the Bar and on perusal of the record, this Court is of the opinion that, if the petitioner is eligible and entitled for the reliefs as sought for, the request of the petitioner be considered by the respondents in accordance with law and as per procedure as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. [5] It is made clear that the above order is passed without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. In view of the above observation and direction, the present petition is disposed of. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated. Miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. JUDGE suhanjit Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2024. 11. 13 12:12:50 SUHANJIT SINGHA +05'30'
Source: High Court of Tripura. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.