NARAYAN BIR Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner as well as Mr. N. Chowdhury, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents.

(2.) Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel has submitted that unless the appointment is given with effect from 16/5/2005, the petitioner will be seriously prejudiced inasmuch as, even the benefit under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) or under similar other schemes would unnecessarily be delayed. Since the respondents have refused to count completion of required service with effect from 16/5/2005, the petitioner being aggrieved, has approached this court for reviewing that part of the order dtd. 30/1/2019 delivered in a series of writ petitions including W.P.(C) No.811 of 2018, titled as Narayan Bir v. State of Tripura and Anr. For purpose of reference the operative part of the said order is extracted below:

(3.) Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel has submitted that if the seniority is acceded to, why the release of benefits accruing from the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) or its subsequent versions cannot be release on the basis of that date. The concession as was given, was qualified and on the basis of such concession given by the respondents, the writ petition was disposed of.