PUJA DATTA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. R. Barman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Sharma, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on advance copy.

(2.) Petitioner is the daughter of one Bhulan Bhusan Datta who was working as a Junior Technician in the department of Science, Technology and Environment. He died while in service on 12.02.2018 leaving behind his widow and the petitioner a married daughter. The petitioner applied for appointment under die-in-harness scheme framed by the State of Tripura under application dated 23.04.2018. So far, the respondents have not passed any order on such application.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that one possible ground where the Government has not yet decided the said application could be that the respondents believed that as a married daughter the petitioner is not covered under the die-in-harness scheme. He has drawn my attention to a recent judgment of this Court dated 18th December, 2019 in WP(C) No.562 of 2019 in case of Smt. Debashri Chakraborty v. The State of Tripura and others in which the question of inclusion of a married daughter in the die-in-harness scheme of the Government came up for consideration. This Court after referring to large number of decisions of other High Courts cited by the counsel for the petitioner came to following conclusions :