Case: Smt. Krishna Roy (Ganguly) vs Sri Mrinal Kanti Datta and the State of Tripura
Introduction
The High Court of Tripura gave justice to both the Defendant and the Petitioner. To Defendant, in terms of benefits like monetary and to Petitioner psychologically in terms of seniority.
Facts of the case
A writ appeal was filed against the judgement of the learned single Judge. The Appellant was appointed as a direct recruit blind educator based on the recommendation of the Tripura Public Service Commission (TPSC). She possessed all the required qualifications needed for the job. On the contrary, the original Petitioner joined the same post on an ad-hoc basis. According to the recruitment regulations, he lacked the appropriate qualifications for the required position. Years later, he completed his training and, after that, regularised by TPSC. He filed an appeal that he may be granted the full benefit of the past service, and his service from the inception may be regularised. The court ruled in favour of the Petitioner.
Arguments of the petitioner
The Appellant’s Counsel argued that Defendant could not march over him in terms of seniority as he was regularly appointed through TPSC initially, and the Respondent was appointed on an ad-hoc basis. Moreover, by the time he finished training, the condition of filling the position via TPSC was already implemented.
Arguments of the defendant
Defendant claimed that he was treated unfairly. He was not sent for training even after repeated requests. Finally, he underwent training at his own cost. Even after that, he was not regularised and asked to clear the TPSC test, which was unnecessary when he joined the job.
The stand of the State Government
The State Government was in favour of the benefits given to Defendant for his past services. The only point in their discretion was the matter of seniority. In their opinion, Defendant should have raised the issue earlier, but he pointed it after years when he finally completed the training and got a regularised job. The injustice to him should have been reported earlier. The learned single Judge’s decision granted seniority to the Defendant from the initial engagement; thus, this should be reversed.
Court’s opinion
The Court ordered that Defendant shall have all the benefits given to him except in the case of seniority. The seniority would be calculated from the date of regularisation and not from his initial appointment.
Click here to view the Judgment.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
