Chandrahari Rangkhwaland5 ORS v. State Of Tripura And 6 ORS




 

     
   
 !"#!$%&"$!$"#"$%'(!$)
care
of
8th
BN
TSRIRIII,
Commandant,
TSR,
Lalchera,
P.O.
Chailengta,
District
-
Dhalai

*  +,+
 !"# --$./$)$($"
son
of
Shri
Dhirendra
Ch.
Malakar,
care
of
8th
BN
TSRIRIII,
Commandant,
TSR,
Lalchera,
P.O.
Chailengta,
District
-
Dhalai


 % 0, 0
 !"##-#1!! $1
son
of
Shri
Umesh
Ch.
Das,
care
of
8th
BN
TSRIRIII,
Commandant,
TSR,
Lalchera,
P.O.
Chailengta,
District
-
Dhalai

 % 

,
 !"#"2% $"($"
son
of
late
Khetra
Mohan
Sarkar,
care
of
11th
BN
TSRIR(VII),
P.O.
Gakulnagar,
Agartala,
District
-
West
Tripura

,
 % , 
 !"#3$&!2 $%4$%!$(.$
son
of
Shri
Indra
Kumar
Chakma,
care
of
4th
BN,
Commandant,
TSR,
P.O.
Kanchanpur,
North
Tripura


 % ,0
 !"#/$%#"$."#52"$
son
of
late
Jer
Ch.
Tripura,
care
of
2nd
Bn,
Commandant,
TSR,
P.O.
R.K.
Nagar,
District
-
West
Tripura


 66



7-#-#%7"1 87"121

[2] 
!7 -$-7"#52"$
represented
by
the
Secretary,
Home
Department,
Government
of
Tripura,
New
Secretariat
Complex,
P.O.
Kunjaban,
District
-
West
Tripura




!7 #"79-"7%7"$) )#97
Government
of
Tripura,
P.O.
Agartala,
West
Tripura
District


!7 752-:
%1579-"7%7"$)
)#97 /;

 
P.O.
Agartala,
Tripura
West

!7..$%&$%-
8th
Bn.
TSR
(IRIII)
,
P.O.
Chailengta,
Dhalai
District
,
!7..$%&$%-
11th
Bn.
TSR
(IRVII),
P.O.
Gokulnagar,
West
Tripura
District




!7..$%&$%-
4th
Bn.
TSR
,
P.O.
Kanchanpur,
North
Tripura
District
+
!7..$%&$%-
2th
Bn.
TSR
P.O.
R.K.
Nagar,
Agartala,
West
Tripura
District,
Agartala


 6 715%&7%-1 <

  =</ 3 
   
For
the
petitioners













:

Mr.
C.S
Sinha,
Advocate
For
the
respondents






:

Ms.
A.S.
Lodh,
Addl.
G.A




Date
of
delivery
of




:

,,
judgment
&
order
Whether
it
is
fit
for
reporting





:

>71  √























































































































[3]

/;

   Heard
Mr.
C.S
Sinha,
learned
counsel
appearing
for
the
petitioners
as
well
as
Ms.
A.S
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A.
appearing
for
the
respondents.
?@ The
grievance
of
the
petitioners
falls
within
a
short
compass.
All
the
petitioners
were
eligible
to
appear
in
the
limited
departmental
examination
in
terms
of
the
memorandum
dated
24.10.2009,
Annexure1
to
the
writ
petition.
The
said
memorandum
dated
24.10.2009
was
issued
in
terms
of
one
time
relaxation
granted
by
the
competent
authority,
subject
to
the
qualifications
as
under:

$ /21- !$A7 $- )7$1- 07#'!- :7$"1 1$-#1$9-": 17"A#97 ". -!7 &$-7  $55#%-.7%-#%  B /21- !$A7 5$117& 179%& 9)$11 97"-##9$-77&29$-#%" -!1-$%&$"&$%& $)1 12B479- - -!7#" 12997112) 5$11#%' )#.#-7&7C$.

#%$-#%"-!7#%$)17)79-#% There
is
no
dispute
that
the
petitioners
could
not
clear
the
firing
test
and
as
a
result,
the
competent
authority
afforded
them
another
opportunity
to
appear
in
the
final
test
on
10.08.2010
in
the
TSR
Centre
at
R.K.
Nagar
as
would
be
evident
from
the
communication
dated
09.08.2010,
Annexure5
to
the
writ
petition.
But
the
petitioners
could
not
appear
as
they
were
detained
by
their
Commandant,
8th
Battalion
TSRIR(III)
for
operational
commitment.
The
Commandant,
8th
Battalion
TSR IR(III)
had
communicated
by
a
message
dated
11.08.





















































































































[4] released
for
appearing
in
the
firing
test
due
to
operational
commitment
in
the
context
of
the
independence
day
celebration.
Thereafter,
by
another
communication
dated
19.08.2010
available
at
Annexure7
to
the
writ
petition,
the
Commandant,
7th
Battalion
TSR(IRVI)
had
informed
that
the
date
for
the
firing
test
for
the
unsuccessful
candidates
had
been
fixed
on
25.08.2010
at
TSR
Centre,
R.K.
Nagar.
There
is
no
dispute
that
in
the
said
test,
the
petitioners
succeeded
to
clear
the
final
firing
test
and
accordingly,
the
result
was
published
on
31.08.2010,
Annexure
10
to
the
writ
petition.
On
01.10.2010
by
an
order
under
No.843651/F.(14)/DAP/TSR/RSV/09,
Annexure9
to
the
writ
petition,
198
persons
were
appointed
as
the
Havilder(GD)
in
the
Pay
Band
of
Rs.

53102400/
with
Grade
Pay
of
Rs.1800/
as
per
inter
se
seniority
against
the
existing
vacancies
reserved
for
SC/ST
category
in
the
post
of
Habilder(GD)
in
the
TSR
BNs
(1st
to
13th
BN)
in
terms
of
one
time
relaxation
as
allowed
by
the
Government.
At
this
juncture,
it
is
to
be
noted
that
the
total
number
of
vacancies
to
the
post
of
Havilder(GD)
as
declared
by
the
memorandum
dated
24.10.2009
for
the
SC/ST
candidates
were
313.



?

@
Mr.
C.S.
Sinha,
learned
counsel
appearing
for
the
petitioners
has
submitted
that
the
petitioners
cannot
be
made
responsible
under
any
pretext
for
not
appearing
in
the
firing
test
held
on
10.08.2010
and
hence,
they
cannot
be
deprived
from
their
promotion
when
they
had
cleared
the
firing
test.





















































































































[5] ?@
From
the
other
side,
Ms.
A.S.
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A.
appearing
for
the
respondents
having
referred
to
the
counter
affidavit
filed
by
the
respondents
No.1
to
7
has
submitted
that
the
final
test
was
scheduled
on
10.08.2010
and
that
date,
time
and
place
were
intimated
to
the
petitioners.
The
petitioners
could
not
appear
in
the
final
test
as
the
Commandant,
8th
Bn.
TSR
did
not
release
them
on
the
schedule
date
due
to
operational
commitment
in
connection
with
the
independence
day
celebration.
Thereafter,
the
Commandant,
7th
Bn.
TSR
(IRVI)
conducted
the
firing
test
on
25.08.2010
at
TSR
Center
at
R.K.
Nagar
and
that
was
also
informed
to
the
concerned
TSR
Commandants.
There
is
no
dispute
as
Ms.
A.
S.
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A.

submits,
that
all
the
petitioners
passed
the
final
firing
test.
She
has
referred
the
following
passage
from
Para7
of
the
counter
affidavit
which
reads
as
under:

D
-#1-B712B.#--7&!7"7-!$-57"1%%7)E!!$& F2$)##7& -!7#" $#)7& 12B479- B: $--7%&#%' #% -!7 #%$) -71- !7)& % ,0 92)& %- B7 5".-7& - -!7 "$%(  $A#)&7"   B: E$:  &#"79- 5".-#% $1 %7 -#.7 "7)$C$-#% " -!7 52"517$99"&7&B:-!7 -$-7A7"%.7%-.

75$"-.7%- A#&7 &$-7& +0  !$& $)"7$&: B77% $A$#)7& B: '#A#%' &#"79- 5".-#%   0 57"1%%7)%G ?,@
Ms.
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A.
appearing
for
the
respondents
has
further
submitted
that
the
petitioners
could
not
be
promoted
along
with
198
successful
candidates
as
they
did
not
appear
in
the
final
firing
test
held
on
10.08.2009
but
subsequently
the
petitioner
No.1
has
been
promoted
to
the
post
of
Havilder
(GD).
Ms.
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A.
has
submitted





















































































































[6] that
the
petitioners
namely,
Arun
Sarkar,
Maniram
Tripura
and
Jadhu
Rn.
Chakma
appeared
in
the
firing
test
held
on
10.08.2010
but
they
could
not
succeed.
Later
on,
they
have
been
given
opportunity
to
appear
on
25.08.2010
and
they
cleared
the
firing
test.
Ms.
Lodh,
learned
Addl.
G.A
has
expressed
her
anguish
as
the
petitioners
have
not
revealed
the
fact
which
are
relevant
for
adjudication
of
their
right. ?@ At
this
juncture,
Mr.
C.S.
Sinha,
learned
counsel
has
produced
the
copy
of
the
promotion
order
whereby
the
petitioner
No.1
namely,
Shri
Chandrahari
Hrangkhal
has
been
promoted
to
the
post
of
Havilder
(GD).
It
is
apparent
from
the
order
dated
28.10.2011
that
the
petitioner
No.

1
has
been
promoted
as
the
Havilder
(GD)
but
the
other
petitioners
have
not
been
so
promoted.

 ?+@ For
appreciating
the
submissions
made
by
the
learned
counsel
for
the
parties,
this
Court
has
also
perused
the
order
dated
17.08.2009,
AnnexureR/1
to
the
counter
affidavit
filed
by
the
respondents
where
it
has
been
stated
that
vacant
post
of
Havilder
(GD)
from
amongst
eligible
Naik
(GD),
Lance
Naik
(GD)
and
Riflemen
(GD)
who
fulfilled
the
criteria
as
already
taken
note
of
by
this
Court.
Thus,
the
vacancies
available
in
the
Battalions
of
TSR
were
filled
up
by
promotion
to
the
rank
of
Havilder
(GD).
It
is
apparent
that
there
were
313
vacancies
and
all
313
vacancies
were
earmarked
for
ST/SC
candidates.





















































































































[7] Therefore,
even
after
filling
up
of
198
vacancies
from
the
total
vacancies
of
313,
there
are
115
more
vacancies
left
to
be
filled
up
by
promotion
in
terms
of
the
order
dated
17.08.2009,
AnnexureR/1
to
the
writ
petition.
Therefore,
this
Court
is
of
the
considered
view
that
the
reason
so
advanced
by
the
respondents
for
not
giving
promotion
to
the
petitioners
is
not
tenable.
Accordingly,
the
respondents
are
directed
to
appoint
the
petitioners
on
promotion
w.e.f.
01.10.2010.
However,
since
the
petitioners
did
not
assume
the
duty
along
with
those
persons
who
was
appointed
on
promotion
as
the
Havilder
(GD)
by
the
order
dated
01.10.

2010,
they
may
not
be
entitled
to
actual
financial
benefit
but
their
pay
shall
be
fixed
notionally,
deeming
their
promotion
to
the
post
of
Havilder
(GD)
w.e.f.
01.10.2010.
But
from
this
day,
they
would
be
entitled
to
get
the
actual
financial
benefits.
The
formal
appointment
letters
be
issued
by
the
competent
authority
within
a
period
of
one
month
from
the
day
when
a
copy
of
this
judgment
and
order
would
be
made
available.

With
this
observation
and
direction,
this
writ
petition
stands
allowed
to
the
extent
as
indicated
hereinabove.

There
shall
be
no
order
as
to
costs.