JUDGMENT AND ORDER : This writ petition has got a chequered history. The petitioner was engaged as the Woman Home Guard in the Home Guard Organization on 09.09.1989 under Die-in-Harness Scheme for death of her father in harness. Her father was working as the Pharmacist under the Home Department. 2. The petitioner filed representations on numerous occasion urging regulariztion of her service in a post, borne in the Group-D category but without any positive yield. Being persuaded by the circumstances, she had filed a writ petition being WP(C) No. 590 of 2010 in the Gauhati High Court which had the jurisdiction over this state and pressed for a direction on the respondents to regularize her service. While disposing the said writ petition by the order dated 01.03.2011, this Court having observed that the relevant facts directed the respondent No. 2, the Director General of Police, Tripura to dispose the representation of the petitioner dated 20.03.2009 within the period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the copy of that order, by a speaking order. 3. The Direct General of Police (DGP in short), in compliance of the said order disposed the said representation by the order under No. 292-94/R-122/DGP/LC/2010 dated 02.04.2011. For purpose of reference the text of the entire order is reproduced hereunder: ORDER The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court, Agartala Bench, while disposing of the Case No. WP(C). No. 590 of 2010 vide its order dated 01.03.2011 directed that: “In view of the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the parties, this Court is of considered opinion that it would meet justice if the Respondent No. 2 is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 20.03.2009 within a period of 02(two) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, by a speaking order. It is ordered accordingly”. The petitioner is also directed to furnish a copy of this order along with the copy of the writ petition to the Respondent No. 2 within a period of 07(seven) days from today. With the aforesaid order, the instant writ petition is disposed of.” In accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Gawahati High Court, Agartala Bench petitioner Smti. Swapna Biswas of the above writ petition submitted a prayer before the undersigned on 05.03.2011 i.e. within the time allowed by the court. I have carefully examined and considered the representation. With the aforesaid order, the instant writ petition is disposed of.” In accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Gawahati High Court, Agartala Bench petitioner Smti. Swapna Biswas of the above writ petition submitted a prayer before the undersigned on 05.03.2011 i.e. within the time allowed by the court. I have carefully examined and considered the representation. On this issue perusal of records indicates that on receipt of representation of the petitioner Smti. Swapna Biswas, Woman Home Guards dated 20.03.2009 for providing regular job under Die-in-Harness Scheme, the process for sending of proposal for providing regular job to the petitioner was initiated on 22.04.2009. in the meanwhile on 25.01.2010, Shri Tanmoy Chakraborty, learned Advocate, High Court Bar, Agartala served a Demand Notice for an on behalf of Smti. Swapna Biswas, Woman Home Guard for the purpose of regular job under Die-in-Harness Scheme. On receipt of said demand notice the matter was sent to the Home Department, Government of Tripura vide letter No. 14933/F.16(2)(A)-PHQ/03 dated 31.03.2010. in the said letter Home Department was pointed out that on the basis of her application, the petitioner was enrolled as Women Home Guard on compassionate ground under Die-in-Harness Scheme along with 11(eleven) persons. Most of them were given regular appointment based on representations of the petitioners. But Smt Swapana Biswas did not submit any prayer for permanent Govt. job during her tenure as W/HG. In the said letter it was also informed that her educational qualification was madhyamik plucked. She was married and living with her husband. The Home Deptt. Was accordingly requested to take up the matter with the competent authority whether Smt. Swapna Biswas was eligible for the post of Group-'D' on regular basis under Die-in-Harness Scheme and to convey the decision to PHQ at the earliest. This was followed by a reminder of the aforesaid letter to Home Deptt. On 10.05.2010. On the basis of our 02(two) references Home Deptt. Vide letter dated 11.05.2010 asking PHQ to furnish the family status, including marital status of Smt. Swapna Biswas W/HG for taking further action. This was followed by the reminder from Home Deptt. Vide letter dated 14.06.2010 for taking further action. On 17.07.2010 after due verification PHQ furnished the details of family status including marital status of Smt Swapna Biswas informing that in 1992 Smt Swapna Biswas married one Tulashi Naha who is serving as Head Constable and posted in DIB (West). This was followed by the reminder from Home Deptt. Vide letter dated 14.06.2010 for taking further action. On 17.07.2010 after due verification PHQ furnished the details of family status including marital status of Smt Swapna Biswas informing that in 1992 Smt Swapna Biswas married one Tulashi Naha who is serving as Head Constable and posted in DIB (West). This was followed up by PHQ reminder on 21.07.2010 with a request to take up the matter with the competent authority and convey the decision on issue of employment at the earliest. In reply to aforesaid letter from PHQ, Home Deptt., vide their letter dated 06.09.2010 asked PHQ to examine the merit of the case in the light of the provision of sub Para-IV of Memorandum No. F.1(2)-GA/77, dated 19.11.1979 which states, “the object of die-in-harness is to provide employment to one of the dependents of Govt. servant, in cases when a Govt. servant dies in sheerness. The appointment should be made straight way by the department concerned to a son/daughter or a Dependant who would look after the family. In reply to Home Deptt., letter dated 06.09.2010, PHQ under letter dated 26.11.2010 intimated Home Deptt that at the time of appointment Smt Swapna Biswas was Dependant on the deceased Govt. servant and their was no earning member in the family of the deceased and as a result as per Memorandum No. F.1.(2)-GA/77, dated 19.11.1979, Appointment and Services Deptt., Govt. of Tripura Smt. Swapna Biswas was eligible for regular job under Die-in-Harness Scheme. Home Deptt was also informed that as per modified policy of the State Govt. under Din-in-Harness scheme vide No. F1(2)-GA/77 dated 13.08.1996, 7(sever) persons out of 11(eleven) similarly placed persons were provided with regular job on the basis of their representations with a request to take up the matter with competent authority and convey the decision of the Govt. at the earlies. In reply to aforesaid letter from PHQ, the Home Deptt vide letter dated 20.12.2010 asked PHQ to provide information about the regularization of 07 Nos. of persons made earlier for taking necessary action regarding regularization of service of Smt Swapna Biswas. Accordingly, on 10.03.2011, PHQ furnished the details of 07 (seven) Home Guards who were appointed as regular employees under Police Deptt. Home Deptt. With a request to convey the decision of the state Govt. of persons made earlier for taking necessary action regarding regularization of service of Smt Swapna Biswas. Accordingly, on 10.03.2011, PHQ furnished the details of 07 (seven) Home Guards who were appointed as regular employees under Police Deptt. Home Deptt. With a request to convey the decision of the state Govt. On 04.04.2011, PHQ requested Home Deptt to take action on the demand notice of the petitioner followed by another request dated 06.04.2011 but, till date no reply has been received by PHQ regarding the aforesaid three letters from PHQ dated 10.03.2011. 04.04.2011 and 06.04.2011. Now, in compliance of the Hon'ble High Court's order dated 01.03.2011, this office has further forwarded the representation of W/H.G. 893041 Smti Swapna Biswas dated 20.03.2009 to the Home Department on 28.04.2011 with copies of documents viz Death Certificate of Lt. Chitta Rn. Biswas, Ex-Pharmacist, (ii) Admit Card of Madhyamik examination of Smti Biswas, (iii) Mark-sheet of Madhyamik examination of Smti. Biswas and (iv) Citizenship Certificate of Smti Biswas, for consideration her representation to provide regular job commensurate to her educational qualification under Die-in-Harness Scheme. On receipt of Government approval, action will be taken forthwith”. 4. From the perusal of the said order it emerged that similarly situated Home Guards were appointed as the regular employees under the Police Department. But at that time, the petitioner's case was not considered. In that backdrop, the Director General of Police, Tripura, has observed that with all material records, the representation of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Home Department and if the Home Department accords approval, the appropriate action would be taken up. 5. The Director General of Police in the said order dated 02.04.2011 did not provide any background why regularization of the petitioner was discarded. However, the decision of the Home Department is available in the communication dated 16.06.2011 (Annexure P-5 to the writ petition) which is addressed to the DGP, Tripura. From the said communication, it appears that the Home Department has regretted by saying that the petitioner is not entitled for regular Government Job under Die-in-Harness Scheme as there are earning members in her family and she has exceeded the maximum age for recruitment in the Government service. 6. Mr. From the said communication, it appears that the Home Department has regretted by saying that the petitioner is not entitled for regular Government Job under Die-in-Harness Scheme as there are earning members in her family and she has exceeded the maximum age for recruitment in the Government service. 6. Mr. B. N. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has fundamentally raised two questions (i) whether the date of consideration would be considered for regularization or the date when the father of the petitioner died in harness would be considered to adjudge whether the petitioner is suitable for appointment under the Die-in-Harness Scheme and (ii) whether the petitioner has been discriminated in the process by which 7 other similarly circumstanced Home Guards were regularized by the Government? 7. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel has emphatically submitted that the relevant date shall be the date of death of the employee who died in harness and all consideration are bound to be made basing on that date only. He has further submitted that it is the DGP who has revealed 7 other similarly circumstanced Home Guards were regularized but on the ground that the petitioner did not make any representation at the relevant point of time, her case was not considered. Such non-consideration is discriminatory inasmuch as whether someone has filed the representation or not is immaterial, it is the duty of the authorities to treat the similarly circumstanced persons similarly else it would invite the wrath of Article 14/16 of the Constitution of India. 8. In reply to such submission of Mr. Majumder, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J. Majumder learned counsel representing the respondents has submitted that the Home Department has considered the status that was prevailing on the day of consideration for regularization and they had considered whether on that date the petitioner was suitable to be appointed under the Die-in-Harness Scheme. 9. Mr. Majumder has produced the File No. 16 (3/PHQ/95) relating to die-in-harness cases. It has emerged that the said File was opened on 18.012.1995. On examination of that file, it transpired that the DGP after making assessment has made the following note: “Sl. No. 15. Smti Swapna Biswas (UR) (DOB-5.2.63, Madhamik appeared) D/O deceased Pharmacist Chitta Rn. Biswas. Police Hospital Quarter Complex. Note: (i) Can not be considered as her brothers are already in Government service. (ii) She has been serving as Women Home Guard Volunter. No. 15. Smti Swapna Biswas (UR) (DOB-5.2.63, Madhamik appeared) D/O deceased Pharmacist Chitta Rn. Biswas. Police Hospital Quarter Complex. Note: (i) Can not be considered as her brothers are already in Government service. (ii) She has been serving as Women Home Guard Volunter. Since 09.09.89 and got married with a Government employee. This was the outcome of the consideration by the Director General of Police as reflected in the communication addressed to the Additional Secretary (Home) Government of Tripura, Agartala under No. 27306/16(3)-PHQ/95 dated 24.08.1996”. 10. It is clear from the said note that the relevant date i.e. the date of death of father of the petitioner was not considered as the base day for consideration. However, it revels clearly that for death of her father, the petitioner was engaged as the Home Guard in the Home Guard Organization on 09.09.1989 and there is no controversy that the said engagement as the Home Guard was made in favour of the petitioner under the Die-in-Harness Scheme. It has further transpired from the records that 7 other persons who were engaged as the Home Guards under Die-in-Harness Scheme were regularized on the basis of their representation, but the petitioner was not so regularized. 11. Mr. Majumder, has further submitted that on 14.06.2016 this Court had passed the following order as under: List the matter on 15.07.2016. Meanwhile, Mr. J. Majumder may obtain instruction as to whether the petitioner can be accommodated in any regular post”. 12. Mr. Majumder has produced the file relating to this writ petition where the decision of the Home Department on taking notice of the order dated 14.06.2016 is available. For purpose of reference, the entire text of the said communication is reproduced in its entirety: To Dated, Agartala the 8th July, 2016 The Director General of Police, Tripura, Agartala Subject: Order dated 14.06.2016 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Tripura in Case No. WP(C). No. 302 of 2011 (Smt. Swapna Naha (Biswas) Vs. The State of Tripura & Anr. Sir, The undersigned is directed to refer to the letter No. 29517-18/F.16(2)(A)-PHQ/2003, dated 2nd July, 2016 on the subject mentioned above and to inform you that the matter has been examined as per the revised Die-in-Harness Scheme (copy enclosed) and it appears that the two brothers of the petitioner are in Government service. The State of Tripura & Anr. Sir, The undersigned is directed to refer to the letter No. 29517-18/F.16(2)(A)-PHQ/2003, dated 2nd July, 2016 on the subject mentioned above and to inform you that the matter has been examined as per the revised Die-in-Harness Scheme (copy enclosed) and it appears that the two brothers of the petitioner are in Government service. Moreover, she has married in the year 1992 and thereafter, she cannot be considered as dependent family member as per the revised scheme. As per filed enquiry report addressed to the Commandant Home Guards Organization dated 10.06.2010 (copy enclosed), husband of the of petitioner is also a Government employee. In view of the above, I am directed to state that the case of the petitioner for providing regular Government service could not be considered as she is found to be ineligible for obtaining regular Government service under the revised Die-in-Harness Scheme and the aforesaid position may be taken up with Ld. Advocate for apprising the Hon'ble High Court in the next date of hearing”. 13. Mr. Majumder, has submitted that since on the day of regularization it emerged that the petitioner's husband has been working in the Government Department and her two brothers are also employed in the Government Department and her case of regularization was not acceded by the Government. 14. Having due regard to the records and the submission made by the learned counsel, this Court is constrained to observe that the status of the petitioner was not considered by the respondents in its perspective. 15. The petitioner was found eligible for appointment under Die-in-Harness Scheme and she was accordingly engaged as the Home Guard on 09.09.1989. Hence, there cannot be further examination regarding eligibility of the petitioner whether she is eligible to be engaged under Die-in-Harness Scheme or not. The question that is left to be considered by the respondents is that whether the petitioner's service can be regularized or not. After getting the engagement/appointment under Die-in-Harness Scheme, if the employee's status turns different or is changed that cannot be considered as the relevant factor for regularization of her service in the regular establishment. 16. What has further emerged from the order of the DGP dated 02.04.2011 is that the similarly circumstanced Home Guards who were junior to the petitioner, in order of engagement, were regularized in the post of police constables as the Group-D employee. 16. What has further emerged from the order of the DGP dated 02.04.2011 is that the similarly circumstanced Home Guards who were junior to the petitioner, in order of engagement, were regularized in the post of police constables as the Group-D employee. The ground for not considering the case of the petitioner, as is available, is that the petitioner did not make any representation. This cannot be treated as a valid ground for regularizing the Home Guards under Die-in-Harness Scheme. 17. It is the obligation of the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner whether the petitioner was eligible for the said regularization. This Court has not been equipped with the material particulars of those 7 persons and as such, this Court is not embarking on any comparison of their service particulars. In the considered view, the date on which the petitioner's status was considered was not relevant. The respondents are directed to consider the relevant factors or suitability for appointment under Din-in-Harness Scheme on the day of death of her father who was serving as the pharmacist under the police organisation, Home Department. 18. Since the petitioner was appointed on such consideration as the Home Guard on 09.09.1989, the respondents are bound to accept that the petitioner was eligible under Die-in-Harness Scheme. As the similarly circumstanced home guards have been regularized, it is expected that the petitioner shall be treated similarly. The respondents shall consider the case of petitioner's regularization on considering the status of the petitioner on the day of death of her father and pass the appropriate order within a period of 3 months from today. The respondents are directed to regularize the service of the petitioner within that period in a post borne in the category of Group-D or any other post commensurate to the petitioner's qualification. If it is found that the petitioner was senior to 7 other persons who were engaged under Din-in-Harness Scheme, the petitioner shall be engaged notionally from the date when those 7 persons were regularized. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to actual financial benefit of her pay and allowances. The pay will be notionally fixed. The petitioner would be entitled to get all the financial benefits on fixation of her pay in the post, against which post the petitioner shall be regularized. 19. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed. The pay will be notionally fixed. The petitioner would be entitled to get all the financial benefits on fixation of her pay in the post, against which post the petitioner shall be regularized. 19. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Records as produced be returned to Mr. J. Majumder learned counsel under sealed cover.