Trishna Singha Roy v. The State of Tripura and ors
Court: High Court of Tripura
Bench: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Tripura judgment dated 2020-11-26. Trishna Singha Roy v. The State of Tripura and ors. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Page - 1 of 3 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No. 520/2020 Smt. Trishna Singha Roy ........... Petitioner(s). Vs. The State of Tripura and Ors. ........... Respondent(s). For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. B Majumder, Asstt. S G. , Mr. D Bhattcharjee, Govt. Advocate. HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI _O_R_D_E_ R_ 26/11/2020 The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to release the family pension in her favour after recalculation on the basis of counting past service rendered by her mother as a School Mother for the purpose of pension fixation. Short facts are as under : Mother of the petitioner joined as a School Mother on ad-hoc th basis on 25 July, 1990 in an Anganwadi run by the respondents. Under nd a memorandum dated 22 November, 2007 her service was regularized th rd w. e. f. 10 February, 2007. She expired on 3 October, 2013.
Thereafter Page - 2 of 3 the petitioner was granted compassionate appointment in Government service looking to her mother’s past service. The case of the of the petitioner is that this Court has rendered judgments partially counting the past services of the School Mothers rendered before their regularizations, for the purpose of pensionary th benefits. According to her, her mother’s service rendered between 25 st July 1990 till 1 October 2007 also similarly be counted for pensionary benefits. If this is done, the petitioner would receive family pension for rd th the period between 3 October, 2013 to 12 July, 2015. In my opinion, the petition suffers from gross delay, laches and inaction on part of the petitioner. The mother of the petitioner when she was alive did not take up any issue of the past service being counted towards pensionary benefits after regularization.
She expired in the year 2013 upon which the petitioner received no family pension presumably since her mother had not put in qualifying service for pension Be that as it may, the petitioner was granted compassionate appointment in Government service which she accepted. Now, five years later, the petitioner has approached this Court raising an issue that had the past service of her mother been counted towards pensionary benefits, the petitioner would have received family pension. At any rate, the cause Page - 3 of 3 of action arose on the date of death of the mother. Seven years have passed since then. There is no explanation why the petition was not filed earlier. The cause also cannot be seen as a continuous one since the petitioner’s right to receive family pension, even if there was any, would seize upon her being appointed in Government service. In the result, petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any also stands disposed of. ( AKIL KURESHI, CJ) Sukhendu
Source: High Court of Tripura. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.