S. Talapatra, J. - (1.)Heard Mr. C. S. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents.
(2.)By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged this court to direct the respondents to engage him as contingent worker or DRW in the Department of Panchayat, Government of Tripura on setting aside the Memorandum dtd. 7/9/2017 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) whereby the request for consideration for such engagement has been denied on the solitary ground that no vacant post in the department till the date was available nor a new post may be created to engage him.
(3.)This is the second round of litigation by the petitioner. Earlier by filing a writ petition being WP(C) 76 of 2012, he had approached this court for a direction to engage him as the contingent worker or DRW. The said writ petition was disposed of by the judgment and order dtd. 27/4/2017 directing the respondent No.3 to consider whether the petitioner can be engaged either as the contingent worker or as the DRW against any vacancy. It was expected that such consideration will be made as expeditiously as possible. But it appears that in terms of the said order, the memorandum dtd. 7/9/2017 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) was issued by the Director of Panchayat, Government of Tripura.
;