Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 121 (TRI)

Khapen Debbarma v. State of Tripura

2014-03-04

U.B.SAHA

body2014
JUDGMENT Utpalendu Bikas Saha, J.:- The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for directing the respondents to allow him to have arrear of salary and allowances and also pensionary benefits for absented period w.e.f. 19.12.1993 to 9.3.2005. Heard Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner, in short, is that the petitioner was initially appointed a junior pump operator on 2.2.1990 and joined on 12.2.1990 in the said post of junior pump operator as a group C employee. Thereafter, the petitioner was kidnapped on 19.12.1994 at the gun point by the NLFT extremists and he was taken away to Bangladesh near Burma border. Ultimately, he was compelled to become a member of the extremists' group and in the middle of September, 2003, he could able to come out successfully from the extremists' captivity to his house under Jirania P.S. On 2.10.2013, the petitioner appeared before Jirania police station narrated the story about his activities as an extremist and Jirania police ultimately arrested him in a criminal case considering him as a member of the extremists' group. 3. On 6.3.1995, a show cause notice (Annexure-C to the writ petition) was issued asking the petitioner to explain as to why the appropriate action would not be taken against him as per provisions of rule. On 11.12.2003, the petitioner submitted a representation for restoration of his service, but the respondent did not consider the same. On 15.4.2004, a memorandum of settlement was made between NLFT extremists and the Govt. of Tripura with some consensus terms and conditions and as per the said settlement, the petitioner was allowed to join in service. On 9.3.2005, the petitioner was restored to his service, but for the period of absence, he was given the benefit of notional fixation of pay and allowances and also the benefits for pension. According to the petitioner, though he was entitled to the arrear of salaries and allowances and pensionary benefits for the period of absence, i.e., from 19.12.1994 to 9.3.2005, but the same were not provided to him. Hence, the writ petition. 4. The state respondents in his counter-affidavit denied the story of the petitioner so far as abduction by the extremists' group is concerned. Hence, the writ petition. 4. The state respondents in his counter-affidavit denied the story of the petitioner so far as abduction by the extremists' group is concerned. The case of the respondents is that the petitioner did not surrender before Jirania police station himself and the police also never took him into custody, but he surrendered himself before His Excellency the Governor of Tripura with the NLFT group on 6.5.2004 at A.D. Nagar police line. Though the respondents admitted that the period of absence of the petitioner was regularized by the respondents allowing him extra ordinary leave as per policy decision made for the surrendered extremists without breaking service, but notional fixation was granted. It is also the case of the respondents that as per policy decision, the petitioner is not entitled to get any arrear salary for the period for which he did not work when he was involved in the extremists' activities. 5. Mr. Datta learned counsel while urging for the relief sought for has placed reliance on the memorandum of settlement dated 15.4.2004 (Annexure-E to the writ petition/Annexure-R 2 to the counter), particularly paragraph-3, wherein it is stated that after return to the normal life, the jobs of those returnees who were State Government employees earlier will be restored, on case to case basis, as per precedence's, if any. This facility will not be extended to those returnees who have committed heinous crime against women. According to Mr. Datta, there is no allegation against the petitioner that he had committed any heinous crime against women. Thus, he is entitled to restoration of not only his job but also for salaries and allowances and pensionary benefits. He further submits that the petitioner himself did not join in extremists' activities but he was forced to join with them after his abduction. 6. Mr. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate while countering the submission of Mr. Datta submits that the story of alleged abduction of the petitioner by the extremists is not only a concocted one but also without any basis. Had he been abducted by the extremists, then his family members would have informed the fact to the police which has not been done in the instant case. Advocate while countering the submission of Mr. Datta submits that the story of alleged abduction of the petitioner by the extremists is not only a concocted one but also without any basis. Had he been abducted by the extremists, then his family members would have informed the fact to the police which has not been done in the instant case. He further submits that the story of his abduction was first time informed by the petitioner in his letter dated 11.12.2003 addressed to the Hon'ble Minister wherein he has requested the authority to allow him to join in his service. 7. As it is the undisputed fact that the petitioner has joined with the extremists and ultimately surrendered as an extremist and also his service was restored by the authority, it is not necessary for this court to discuss about those facts. Actual grievance of the petitioner is that he was not provided the arrear salary and allowances and pensionary benefits for the period when he was absent and involved in the extremists' activities, as per memorandum of settlement. 8. This court has gone through the memorandum of settlement dated 15.4.2004 wherein it is specifically stated that the Government employees who were involved in extremists activities after return to their normal life, their jobs will be restored on case to case basis, meaning thereby, it is the authority who will decide how they will provide the benefit to an employee who has come to normal life leaving their extremists' activities. 9. In the instant case, the petitioner was involved in the extremists activities and after his return to normal life, he was provided all the benefits as he is entitled to according to the policy decision of the Government like regularization of service granting extraordinary leave which would be evident from the letter dated 24.3.2006 (Annexure-K to the writ petition) written by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Tripura to the Commissioner & Secretary, Public Works Department (WR), Agartala, Tripura. The contents of the aforesaid letter are extracted hereunder as the same would be profitable for deciding the issue in question. The contents of the aforesaid letter are extracted hereunder as the same would be profitable for deciding the issue in question. * * * * * * * I am directed to inform you that the Council of Ministers in its meeting dated 16.3.2006 have decided to consider for sanctioning extra ordinary leave for the period of absence as may be determined by the Department concerned in favour of each of the surrenderee without break of service, for benefit of notional fixation of pay and allowances and also benefits for pension of this returnee, namely, Sri Khapen @ Khapang Debbarma (Pump operator), S/o Lt. Surendra Debbarma of Chakmapara, Ranirbazar, Sadar, West Tripura. It is, therefore, requested that Public Works Department (WR) may take necessary action as per decision of the Council of Ministers and confirm action taken to this Department. * * * * Admittedly, the said letter is not under challenge in the instant writ petition, meaning thereby, he has accepted the decision of the respondents as communicated in the said letter dated 24.3.2006. 10. As the petitioner admittedly did not work for the period from 19.12.94 to 9.3.05, he cannot claim salary and allowances for the said period. More so, when the policy specifically stated that the job would be restored, accordingly, job of the petitioner was restored and he was also provided pension and pensionary benefits by way of notional fixation. Thus, according to this court, no wrong was committed by the State respondents providing him regularization for absent period vide Annexure- K & L and no relief can be granted to the petitioner as sought for in absence of any prayer challenging the Annexure-K & L to the writ petition by which his leave was regularized granting extraordinary leave without break of service with the benefit of fixation of pay and allowances notionally for pensionary benefits. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. No order as to costs.