UTTAM KUMAR DEY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions being W.P.(C) No.1329 of 2019 Uttam Kr. Dey v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1330 of 2019 Surabala Namasudra v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1331 of 2019 Basanti Debnath v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1332 of 2019 Kamala Namasudra v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1333 of 2019 Archana Chakraborty v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1334 of 2019 Sova Rani Kar v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1335 of 2019 Jharna Ghosh v. State of Tripura and Ors., W.P.(C) No.1336 of 2019 Ananta Goyala v. State of Tripura and Ors. and W.P.(C) No.1337 of 2019 Rita Debnath v. State of Tripura and Ors. are combined for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch as the relief as urged by these writ petitions are not only common but those writ petitions are set up in the same perspective facts. Earlier, some of the writ petitioners filed writ petitions urging this court for directing the respondents for engaging them as Daily Rated Worker (DRW) on completion of ten years of service as Part Time Worker. It was further urged that the respondents be directed to give the financial benefits including the arrears of wages for such engagement as DRW from the day after the completion of 10 years of service as Part Time Worker. Those writ petitions were disposed of, by this court by the order dated 13.08.2009.

(2.) As it has been asserted that the state through the Finance Department, Government of Tripura has taken a policy decision as reflected in the memorandum dated 16.11.2013 for engaging the Part Time Workers who had served for ten years, as Daily Rated Workers (DRW) and under the said memorandum right had accrued in favour of the petitioner for engagement as PTWs. The petitioners were entitled to be engaged as DRWs on completion of ten years of service. The respondents were directed to take a decision on the basis of the said policy within a period of three months by disposing the representations filed by the petitioner by passing a speaking order. The respondents were also directed to afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(3.) In the event of the representation being decided in favour of the petitioner, such benefits which accrue shall positively be extended to the petitioner from the said memorandum within a period of two months thereafter. If the petitioners are still aggrieved, it shall remain open to them to take recourse of such remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law. Even the petitioners may approach this court for assailing the order, if so required and desired on the same and/or subsequent cause of action.