Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Tripura · body

2025 DAILYLAW 648 (TRI)

Sri Taisa Ram Reang v. The State of Tripura and Ors.

WA/30/2025 · 2025-04-08

S Datta Purkayastha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA I.A. No.01/2025 in W.A. No.30/2025 W.A. No.30/2025 Sri Taisa Ram Reang, S/O. Late Dhananjoy Reang, resident of Jagannathpur, P.O.:- L.C Para, via Ambassa, PIN:-799289, District:-Dhalai, Tripura. ……… Appellant/Applicant(s). V E R S U S 1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, Agartala, West Tripura, New Secretariat Complex, PIN:-799010, Agartala, West Tripura. 2. The Additional Secretary & Director, Food & Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of Tripura, P.N. Complex, Gurkhabasti, P.O.:-Kunjaban, PIN:-799006, District:-West Tripura, Agartala. 3. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ambassa, P.O.:-Ambassa, District:-Dhalai, PIN:-799289. 4. The Accountant General (A & E), Tripura, P.O.-Kunjaban, PIN:-799006, Agartala, Tripura. ………Respondent(s). For Appellant/Applicant(s) : Mr. C.S. Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. G.A., Mr. Soumyadeep Saha, Advocate. HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. PURKAYASTHA Order 08/04/2025 I.A. No.01/2025 in W.A. No.30/2025: Heard Mr. C.S. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant, Mr. P. Gautam, learned Sr. Government Advocate appearing for the respondents-State and Mr. Soumyadeep Saha, learned counsel for the respondent-Accountant General on the prayer for condonation of delay of 83 days in preferring the instant memo of appeal. Upon consideration of the rival submission of the parties and the explanation urged and there being no serious objection to the prayer, delay is condoned. I.A. No.01 of 2025 stands disposed of. W.A. No.30/2025: Heard Mr. C.S. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. P. Gautam, learned Sr. Government Advocate appearing for the respondents-State and Mr. Soumyadeep Saha, learned counsel for the respondent-Accountant General on the main appeal. By the impugned judgment dated 25.11.2024, learned Writ Court has directed the respondents to take a decision on the reply of the petitioner to the show-cause notice dated 10.11.2023 in an expeditious manner and communicate it to him since his gratuity and leave encashment are being withheld. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has superannuated on 30.11.2023 but till date his gratuity and leave encashment amount has not been released. He was serving as Assistant Director (Ad-hoc), Food & Civil Supplies Department, Government of Tripura. Being a retired person, he is facing difficulties. Mr. P. Gautam, learned Sr. Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State, submits that an early decision would definitely be taken as has also been directed by the learned Writ Court. Depending upon such decision, the admissible gratuity and leave encashment due to the appellant would be released. In the aforesaid circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned judgment. However, let the exercise as contemplated on the show-cause notice issued upon the petitioner be completed as expeditiously as possible in a time bound manner, preferably within 12(twelve) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In that view of the matter, the instant appeal is disposed of. (S.D. PURKAYASTHA), J (APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ Pulak PULAK BANIK Digitally signed by PULAK BANIK Date: 2025.04.09 17:34:58 +05'30'