UMA CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
STATE OF TRIPURA
Click here to view full judgement.
S. Talapatra, j. -
(1.)Heard Ms. R. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondent No.1, a mere formal respondent. Also heard Mr. P. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and 3 and Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondents No.4 and 5.
(2.)The original petitioner by means of this writ petition has urged to recalculate the retirement benefits and pay the entire sum with interest. During pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner namely, Ranjit Chouhan expired leaving the substituted writ petitioners behind.
(3.)Since it is the main question is in respect of the property entitled to the original writ petitioner, the substituted writ petitioners have the right to continue the action. The petitioner has given a brief resume of the relevant facts including the existence of a departmental proceeding culminating into an order of stoppage of 2 (two) increments.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.