Mrinal Kanti Pandit v. The State of Tripura and 4 others
Court: High Court of Tripura
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Tripura judgment dated 2024-01-29. Mrinal Kanti Pandit v. The State of Tripura and 4 others. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No. 501 of 2023 Sri Mrinal Kanti Pandit Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Tripura & 04 Ors. Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate Mr. Koomar Chakraborty, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Biswanath Majumder, CGC Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. GA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD ORDER 29. 01. 2024 This present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:- “In the premises whereof, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that Your Lordships would be graciously pleased to : i. Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of them to show cause as to why a writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, mandating/directing them to revoke/rescind the impugned letters dated 23. 08. 2022 & 16. 05. 2023. ii.
Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, mandating/directing them, not to recover any amount, either from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner, or from his monthly pension, on account of the alleged excess payment; iii. Issue Rule, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, mandating/directing them, to release the remaining Gratuity (amounting to Rs. 2. 5 lacs), the entire Commuted Value of Pension, and other outstanding pensionary benefits, along with Interest thereon(due to belated payment thereof), in favour of the petitioner. iv. In the Ad-interim, and thereafter, on hearing the parties, in the Interim, an Order in terms of (i) & (ii) above; v. Call for the records, appertaining to this Writ Petition; vi.
After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the Rule absolute in terms of (i) & (ii) above; vii. Costs of and incidental to this proceedings. viii. Any other Relief(s) as to this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit and proper” [2] Heard Mr. P Roy Barman, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Samarjit Bhattharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Biswanath Majumder, learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents-Union of India. Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. GA appearing on behalf of the State-respondents. [3] It is seen from record that the petitioner has submitted representation dated 14. 06. 2023 before the Official-respondents ventilating his grievances but till date the same is pending with them. [4] In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Official-respondents to consider the representation dated 14. 06.
2023 made by the petitioner before the respondents in accordance with law within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. [5] Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall stand closed. JUDGE Paritosh Digitally signed by SABYASACHI SABYASACHI GHOSH Date: 2024. 01. 30 16:34:23 GHOSH +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.