BIJOY KUMAR HRANGKHAWL Vs. TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. C.S. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that while the petitioner was discharging his duties he suffered an accident and out of that accident, he became disabled. Due to such disability, he could not attend his duties. It is the contention of the respondents that the salary of the petitioner was duly paid upto 16/3/2020. Thereafter, no salary was paid to the petitioner though he was all along willing to join to perform his duties commensurate to his disability.

(3.) From the report of the Standing Medical Board, it is clear that the petitioner was not in a position to perform his official and field level activities which may work out throughout the State. It is further observed in the report dtd. 18/2/2020 that his conditions may improve. In spite of that report, the petitioner was not paid his due salary and other allowances treating his absence from duty as unauthorized. Considering the nature of the case, it would be relevant here-in to reproduce the office memo dtd. 25/2/2015 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions which reads thus: