HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No.28 of 2024 Sri Akhil Das, Cons/GD, Force No. 015090838, son of late Dhirendra Chandra Das, resident of South Pulinpur, P.O. Hawaibari, P.S. Teliamura, District- Khowai, Tripura; ….Petitioner(s) Versus 1) The Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi-110011; 2) The Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector, Central Reserve Police Force, CRPF Digha Complex, P.O. Ashiyana Nagar, P.S. Rajeev Nagar, Patna, Bihar, Pin-800025; 3) The Commandant, 150 Bn. Central Reserve Police Force, Dornapal, Sukma, Chattisgarh, India, Pin-494122; ….Respondent(s) For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, Dy. SGI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 13/02/2025 Heard Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI appearing for the respondents-Union of India. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner, while serving as Constable under the respondents, had been implicated in a criminal case and was detained in custody. After completion of trial of the criminal case, he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment and accordingly, he had suffered so many days under custody. However, in an appeal filed before the High Court, he had been acquitted from the criminal charges. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation for his reinstatement into service, but that representation was not considered by the respondents. Thereafter, he approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition and in the said writ petition, this Court directed the respondents to consider his representation. Page 2 of 2 Thereafter, it was considered by the respondents and he had been reinstated in service, but the period of his absence from duty was declared as dies non. However, it was observed that the period of his absence for 983 days from duty will be countable for pension purpose only. Now, the petitioner has prayed for arrears of salary for the period of his absence from duty, i.e. w.e.f. 24.12.2020, which according to this Court, cannot be allowed in accordance with law. The reliefs already granted to him by the respondents are appropriate and adequate. Accordingly, this Court cannot extend more relief to the petitioner and thus, the prayers made by the writ petitioner in this petition stands rejected. As a consequence, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Rohit SAIKA T KAR Digitally signed by SAIKAT KAR Date: 2025.02.13 16:25:03 +05'30'