BADAL DEBNATH Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon hearing Mr P.K. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr U.B. Saha, learned Govt. Advocate for the State -respondents, I hereby propose to dispose of this writ petition with the following short judgment and order:

(2.) Office order dated 20.3.1998 as in Annexure-6 to the writ petition issued by the Director of Food & Civil Supplies, Tripura refusing the extension of any financial benefit to the writ petitioner, Sri Badal Chandra Debnath, peon more than he has already been paid as subsistence allowance for his suspension for the period from 12.4.1996 to 19.9.1997, and thus denying the claim of the writ petitioner for his full pay and allowances during the period of suspension is the subject matter under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) At the very outset, Mr Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the writ petitioner is covered up by F.R. 54(2) and as such, the authority had lost the sight of this F.R. 54(2) while issuing the impugned order of 20.3.1998, thus depriving the legitimate right of the writ petitioner, and the authority concerned ought to have afforded the Ml pay and allowances to the writ petitioner during the period of his suspension as he was acquitted from the criminal charges, and there is no departmental proceeding as against him except the fact that & departmental proceeding as; against him was contemplated under the related order of 12.4.1996 as in Annexure-1 to the writ petition. However, by virtue of another office order of 8.9.97, his suspension order was duly revoked by the competent authority and he was given posting in the office of Sub-Divisional Officer, Longtharai Valley, Dhalai District as inflected in the document marked as Annexure-3 to the writ petitioner.