HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) 31 of 2026 Smt. Tutu Banik, W/o- Sri Sujit Sutradhar, R/O Aralia, Shiv Mandir Para, P.O- Aralia, P.S:-East Agartala, District: West Tripura PIN:- 799004, Aged about 41 Years. …………Petitioner VERSUS 1. The State of Tripura, Represented by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Government Of Tripura, P.O -Secretariat, P.S New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura, Pin:-799010. 2. The Director Of Secondary Education, Directorate Of Secondary Education School Education Department, Government Of Tripura, P.O - Agartala, P.S West Agartala, District - West Tripura, Pin:- 799001. 3. The Secretary, Managing Committee, Bardowali High (Class- XII) School, P.O : A.D. Nagar, Dist: West Tripura, Pin :- 799003. ………Respondents. For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arijit Bhowmik, Advocate. Ms. I. Chakma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. G.A. Mrs. P. Chakraborty, Advocate. HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD O R D E R 19.01.2026 [1] When the case is called both sides are present before this Court. [2] This present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following the reliefs. “i) Issue notice upon the Respondents. ii) Call for the Records. iii) Issue rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be given the benefit of one increment as per Rule 13(1) (v) of the Tripura States Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 alongwith arrears of financial benefit for completing B.Ed after entry into service and before the cut-off date. AND Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be granted all financial benefits as per the Judgment and order dated 19.01.2022 passed in W.P(C) No. 602/2021 by this Hon'ble High Court ). “ [3] It is seen from the offer of appointment dated 24.06.2008 that there is a specific condition in Sl. No.5, which stipulates that the incumbent shall undergo a probation of 2 years and thereafter, services would be confirmed. Strangely, the said confirmation proceedings are not placed on record and there is no effective pleadings in the affidavit filed by the petitioner to that effect to ascertain with regard to her service condition. The petitioner is only harping upon the fixed pay and thereafter, her right for seeking enhancement of salary by way of certain rules and regulations. [4] Since, onus lies on the petitioner to place it on record with regard to confirmation of appointment of service and the service condition, therefore, this Court is not in a position to entertain the same as the petitioner without placing complete documents and pleadings is not entitled for a relief sought for. At this point of view, this Court opines to dismiss the writ petition. [5] Learned counsel for the petitioner made a request that he would come back with proper pleadings and also would place the relevant documents in support of his claim. He, therefore, prayed to withdraw the same to file fresh writ petition. [6] The request made by learned counsel for the petitioner is considered. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty. DR. T.AMARNATH GOUD,J Paritosh SABYA SACHI GHOSH Digitally signed by SABYASACHI GHOSH Date: 2026.01.27 10:18:23 +05'30'