INDRAJIT BHOWMIK Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged an order dated 30th May, 2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of taxes, Government of Tripura by which the petitioner's request for permanent absorption in the Government service came to be dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner was the employee of Tripura State Co-operative Consumers' Federation Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as a said Federation). He was sent on deputation to Government service and allowed to work in Tax Department. By way of a policy decision the Government decided to repatriate even other similarly situated employees. At that stage he filed W.P(c) No.167/2020 which was disposed of by an order dated 28.02.2020. By the said order itself it was observed that a deputationist has no vested right of absorption. In the said order itself it was observed as under:

(3.) Likewise, the Division Bench of this Court in case of Biplabendu Roy v. State of Tripura and others reported in (2017) 1 TLR 496 also did not lay down a law that a deputationist has a vested right of absorption. It was the case in which even when the employee requested, the State Government refused to relieve him and his employer refused to accept his repatriation. It was in such circumstances, the Court held that the promissory estoppel would prevent the Government from refusing his absorption in service. Such facts are not present in the instant case."