S. Talapatra - (1.)Heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner as well as Mr. N. Chowdhury, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents.
(2.)Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel has submitted that unless the appointment is given with effect from 16/5/2005, the petitioner will be seriously prejudiced inasmuch as, even the benefit under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) or under similar other schemes would unnecessarily be delayed. Since the respondents have refused to count completion of required service with effect from 16/5/2005, the petitioner being aggrieved, has approached this court for reviewing that part of the order dtd. 30/1/2019 delivered in a series of writ petitions including W.P.(C) No.809 of 2018, titled as Tarun Kishore Noatia v. State of Tripura and Anr. For purpose of reference the operative part of the said order is extracted below:
"Today, Mr. Choudhury, learned G.A. has submitted that he has the instruction that the past service of the petitioners would be added as the qualifying service for purpose of pension and seniority. However, Mr. Choudhury, learned G.A. has submitted that the prayer for preponing the date of appointment to 16/5/2005 on which day the petitioners had joined in terms of the engagement order dtd. 7/5/2005 cannot be acceptable as those appointments were not made through any selection process or following the recruitment rules and hence, no financial benefit for the said period can be given to the petitioners. Furthermore, the petitioners knew the consequence of such engagement. They had also participated in the subsequent selection process in terms of the employment notification dtd. 16/8/2006 as enclosed with these writ petitions and on their selection, they were regularly appointed and they were appointed from the date as reflected in the order dtd. 8/8/2012 [Annexure-12 to the writ petition being W.P.(C) No.806 of 2018] under column No.4. Therefore, the period from 16/5/2005 to 31/7/2007 was not counted with the regular service of the petitioners. Since the respondents have favourably considered that the petitioners will be added the said period of service w.e.f. 16/5/2005 to 31/7/2007 and with as the qualifying service for purpose of pension and seniority, this court is of the view that these writ petitions can be disposed of with the following directions viz:

(i) the petitioners' date of appointment for purpose of seniority and the qualifying service for pension etc. shall be 16/5/2005 and

(ii) the period from 16/5/2005 to 31/7/2007 shall be added as the qualifying service but for preponing the date of appointment, in the context of this case the petitioners will not get any financial benefit, even the release of their regular pay scale w.e.f. 31/7/2012 shall remain unaffected."

(3.)Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel has submitted that if the seniority is acceded to, why the release of benefits accruing from the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) or its subsequent versions cannot be release on the basis of that date. The concession as was given, was qualified and on the basis of such concession given by the respondents, the writ petition was disposed of.
;