STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ appeal is preferred by the State appellants against the order of the learned single Judge dated 16.11.2011, passed in CM Application No. 428 of 2011, arising out of WP(C) No. 235 of 2010, wherein the learned Single Judge rejected the prayer for extension of time limit fixed in the order disposing the writ petition as has been already expired. Heard Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State appellants as well as Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner, who submits that the instant writ appeal is required to be dismissed at this stage itself.

(2.) The brief facts needed to be discussed are as follows:

(3.) On 08.04.2009, the respondent-writ petitioner was suspended in contemplation of the disciplinary proceeding against which he has made a representation on 22.09.2009 stating that he is not involved in the case, therefore, his suspension may be revoked and he may be allowed to attend duty. But the State appellants did not revoke the order of suspension of the respondent-writ petitioner and passed the order dated 23.09.2009, enhancing the subsistence allowance of the respondent-writ petitioner by 50% of the allowance as he was getting earlier.