NATARAJ DATTA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks recall and review of a judgment dated 06.08.2021 rendered in WP(C) No.90 of 2020. In the petition the petitioner had challenged a departmental inquiry instituted by the competent authority primarily on the ground that the petitioner had made false statements in an affidavit filed before the Court on the basis of which the petitioner of the said proceedings got undue advantage. The case of the petitioner was that he had not made any misstatements and that he was only guided by the official documents and notings of the superiors. In the judgment under consideration I had come to the conclusion that these are disputed questions and cannot be judged even before the departmental inquiry is completed. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

(2.) In arguing this review petition, learned senior counsel Mr. P. Roy Barman drew my attention to a detailed judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 15.07.2020 in Review Petition No.75 of 2019 in WP(C) No.503 of 2019. My attention was drawn to certain observations made in the said judgment regarding the nature of the affidavit filed by the petitioner and the reasons for the statements made therein. However, this review petition arose in an entirely different background. It was the petition filed by the State Government seeking recall of the judgment in WP(C) No.503 of 2019 in which the petitioner therein was given the benefit of regularization and regular pay scale on the basis of the affidavit filed by the petitioner herein. According to the State Government those statements were not accurate and that action was also initiated against the petitioner for such statements.

(3.) As can be seen, the focal issue in the said review petition was not the allegations against the petitioner which form part of the departmental proceedings. The question was whether the Court should recall and review its earlier judgment granting certain benefits to the petitioner of WP(C) No.503 of 2019. Any observations made in the review judgment, therefore, can at best be relevant consideration in the course of departmental proceedings, cannot be the basis of setting aside the departmental inquiry.