STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. SHIULI DEY CHOUDHURY
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
STATE OF TRIPURA
Shiuli Dey Choudhury
Click here to view full judgement.
Arindam Lodh,J. -
(1.)The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Department of Power, Government of Tripura has preferred the instant intra-court appeal against the judgment and order dtd. 12/5/2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in connection with WP(C) No.65 of 2014, and also against the judgment and order dtd. 26/6/2018, passed in Review Petition No.46 of 2018 connected to the said judgment, passed in WP(C) No.65 of 2014.
(2.)The learned Single Judge in his judgment dtd. 12/5/2017 in WP(C) No.65 of 2014, while disposing of the writ petition has directed the appellants and the Corporation-respondents No.2, 3, 4 and 5 of this appeal, in the manner as follows:
"11. A DRW, it can be perceived without any controversy cannot come from that social layer where there is affluence. They come from the most impoverished layer of the society. A welfare government does once responsibility to such categories of persons and that is the reason why such scheme was introduced. The technicalities in such matter are to be avoided as far as practicable but as this scheme cannot be a fountain of giving the appointments de horse the policy of the public employment that has to be somewhere restricted within a very strict confines of the scheme. But this is a case where this court can place its confidence on the respondent No. 6 for coming forward to consider the case afresh by giving the memorandum dtd. 9/1/2009 a retrospective operation.
12. With this observation, this writ petition is allowed to the extent as indicated above.
13. The respondent No.6 shall take a decision regarding the appointment of the petitioner under the die-in-harness scheme within a period of 3(three) months from the date when the petitioner shall submit a copy of this order to the respondent No.6."
(3.)The aforesaid observation and direction of the learned Single Judge had led the Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited(in short, TSECL), the respondent No.6 in WP(C) No.65 of 2014 to file the review petition which was registered as Review Petition No.46 of 2018. The principal plea taken in that review petition was that on the date of death i.e. on 26/12/2003, the deceased employee was never the employee of the said Corporation, since the Tripura State Electricity Corporation(TSECL) was not formed at that time. However, there is no controversy that the deceased employee was the employee of the Power Department, i.e. the State-appellants.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.