STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. BHAJAN CHANDRA DEBNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Additional Govt. Advocate and Mr. S. Ghosh, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE present Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13. 03. 2001 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Rule No. 394/1994, whereby while adjudicating the issues, Hon'ble High Court passed direction to the State and its authorities to pay to the writ petitioner the arrear of salary to be computed in accordance to the provisions of relevant rules and to promote the writ petitioner from the date his juniors were promoted and granting of all the consequential benefits for which the writ petitioner was entitled.

(3.) IT appears the writ petitioner being aggrieved by the promotion of his juniors, namely respondent Nos. 2 to 15, filed a suit being Title Suit No. 121/1981 in the Court of Sadar Munsiff, Agartala praying for declaration that the seniority list published by the state authorities by Memo dated 30. 08. 1975 to be declared as illegal and void and to treat the writ petitioner as senior to the present respondent Nos. 2 to 25. The writ petitioner also prayed for decree declaring the promotion of respondent Nos. 2 to 15 herein to the post of UDC by passing the claim of the writ petitioner as illegal and for further direction to the present appeals (State respondents in the writ petition) and to promote the writ petitioner to the post of UDC with effect from the date prior to the date of promotion of his juniors. By judgment and decree dated 21. 09. 1987 the Trial Court dismissed the above suit. Being aggrieved, the writ petitioner preferred Title Appeal No. 72/1987 before the District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala. The learned appellate Court by judgment and decree dated 21. 05. 1988 decreed the suit of the writ petitioner in so far as the relief of declaring the invalidity of the seniority list was concerned. The first appellate Court also directed for promotion of the writ petitioner to the post of UDC from the date prior to the date of promotion of his juniors namely respondent Nos. 2 to 15 in the instant appeal. Against the order dated 21. 05. 1988, a Second Appeal No. 19/1998 was preferred by the writ petitioner regarding refusal of relief of declaring the seniority of the writ petitioner over the respondent Nos. 2 to 15 herein. The State-appellants herein also preferred another Second Appeal No. 21/1998 against the order dated 21. 05. 1988 challenging the interim judgment and decree of the appellate Court dated 21. 05. 1988. This Court by judgment and order dated 20. 11. 1992 was pleased to dismiss the appeal filed by the State namely Second Appeal NO. 21/1998. In so far as the appeal filed by the writ petitioner is concerned, this Court directed that the writ petitioner be declared as senior to respondent Nos. 2 to 15 herein. Further direction was issued for preparation of seniority list in terms of the judgment and order of this Court dated 20. 11. 1992.