KASEM MIYA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
STATE OF TRIPURA
Click here to view full judgement.
Arindam Lodh,J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State-respondents.
(2.) By way of filing these writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs and it appears that the prayers made in these writ petitions are same in nature:
'(I) Issue notice upon the respondents.
(II) Call for the records.
(III) Issue rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to engage the petitioner as Daily Rated Worker (DRW) from 2002 i.e. on the completion of 10 years of service as Part time worker and provide the petitioner all the financial benefits thereunder from 2002 itself and further to regularize the petitioner w.e.f. 2012 i.e. on the completion of 10 years of service as DRW and provide them the financial benefits thereunder with retrospective effect, shall not be passed. AND/OR
Issue rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a Writ of certiorari for setting aside/modifying the memorandum dated 17.05.2013 whereby the petitioner was appointed as Daily Rated Worker in 2012 whereas the petitioner is entitled to be engaged as DRW from 2002 itself i.e. on the completion of 10 years of service as Part time worker shall not be passed.
(IV) And after hearing the parties be pleased to make the rule absolute.
Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper.'
(3.) Outlining the relevant facts, in brief, the petitioners were first engaged as Part Time workers (Sweeper) (PTWs, for short) Annexure-1 in MBB College, Agartala vide memorandum dated 01.06.1992 under the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and since then, the petitioners have been working with utmost sincerity and dedication under the respondent No.2. At no point of time, there has been any blemish in the service career of the petitioners.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.