ANAND KUMAR CHOWDHURY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. D.C. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioners were appointed as Havilder (Clerk) under the Tripura State Rifles and when a question arose as to whether they were appointed on tenure basis or not, for determination a high -level committee was constituted by the Government of Tripura, in the Home Department. On reading of the recommendation of the said committee, the petitioners perceived they were not fixed tenure basis but their appointment was on a regular basis. The petitioners thus averred that they were not appointed on fixed tenure basis but on regular basis, based on the memorandum dated 27.11.2004, Annexure -F to the writ petition. The memorandum dated 27.11.2004 is the recommendation of the said high level committee constituted by the Government of Tripura for giving their finding and recommendation on certain issues relating to the Civil Police Organization and the State Rifles. After examination of the issues as referred, the following recommendation was made by the said high level committee.

(3.) MR . Chakraborty, learned Addl. GA has at the outset submitted that the fresh order as to the seniority has been published under No. 4681 -92/F.26(3)/IGP/Adm & Trg Cell/11 dated 07.06.2012, a copy of which has been placed before this Court for perusal. Mr. Saha, learned counsel for the petitioners has not raised any objection in respect of placing the copy of the said order dated 07.06.2012 for obvious reasons.