SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Tri) 95

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Akil Kureshi, J.
Shri Naresh Chandra Datta & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Tripura & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 1477/2017 and WP(C) No. 1478/2017
Decided On : 16-07-2020

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. H. Deb, Asstt. S.G, Mr. Mangal Debbarma, Addl. G.A, Mr. Biswanath Majumder, Cgc, for the Respondent

Teachers transitioning from undergraduate to graduate roles hold fresh appointments entitling them to Career Advancement Scheme benefits, irrespective of prior salary adjustments or classifications.

Headnote:(A) Government of Tripura - Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) - The petitioners complained about denial of benefit of CAS-III despite completing the requisite service and qualifications, with claims supported by prior rulings that granted similar benefits to others in analogous situations. The court found that appointments post-graduation were not promotions but new appointments entitled to CAS-III benefits. The entitlements were recognized, and delays in claims were addressed collectively, but historical arrears were restricted. (Paras 2-10)

(B) Service Law - The principle of continuous cause of action applies to salary and pension claims, allowing for claims despite delays. (Paras 7-8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, both teachers, completed their graduations and were granted higher pay scales but claimed denial of CAS-III benefits erroneously classified as promotions. The actual orders regarding their CAS-III were either not implemented or were countered by recovery actions taken by the department.

Findings of Court:
The petitioners were entitled to CAS-III effective from respective dates; their pensions to be recalculated accordingly, while past dues were limited to three years prior to filing for adjustment.

Issues: Whether appointees' transitions from undergraduate to graduate teachers constitute promotions affecting CAS eligibility.

Ratio Decidendi: Appointments as graduate teachers upon completion of degrees are fresh appointments entitling beneficiaries to CAS-III, conflicting classifications by departments are invalidated by established rulings.

Result: Petitions allowed with specific orders for implementation.

Table of Content
1. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT

Akil Kureshi, J. - The petitions arise in similar background. They would be disposed of by this common judgment. Petitioners have raised a grievance about the Government of Tripura not granting them the benefit of 3rd Career Advancement Scheme (CAS-III, for short).

2. Brief facts are as under:

The petitioner of WP(C) No. 1477 of 2017 Sri Naresh Chandra Datta was appointed as an undergraduate teacher in an aided school on 06.08.1970. In the year 1973 the petitioner completed his graduation. He was, therefore, granted a fresh appointment as a graduate teacher on 18.06.1973. He was placed in a higher pay scale corresponding to that of a graduate teacher. During his service career he was given benefits of CAS-I and CAS-II as and when due. According to him, after completion of 29 years of service without promotion he would be entitled to CAS-III which became due w.e.f. 05.05.2001. The department also had passed an order granting benefit of CAS-III to the petitioner w.e.f. 05.05.2001 by placing him in the next higher scale of Rs.7,450-13,000/- and fixing his basic salary at Rs. 12,000/- in the said scale. However, the actual benefit of this order was never given to the petitioner. He continued to draw salary in the lower scale without the benefit of CAS-III. He eventually retired on superannuation w.e.f. 31.03.2010. He received his post retiral benefits such as, gratuity on the basis of his last pay drawn. His pension was also fixed accordingly. The petitioner contends that after he completed graduation, he was granted fresh appointment as a graduate teacher which was neither a promotion nor a financial upgradation. The department, therefore, erroneously denied the benefit of CAS-III on the ground that in the year 1973 the petitioner had enjoyed one promotion/financial upgradation and, therefore, during his remaining service career he was entitled to the benefit of CAS-I and CAS-II only. Petitioner relies heavily on a decision of this Court dated 11.12.2014 in WP(C) No.408 of 2008 and connected petition in case of Shri Amarendra Bhattacharjee vrs. The State ofTripura and others.

3. In WP(C) No. 1478 of 2017 the petitioner Sri Subrata Bhowmik was appointed as a substitute teacher in an aided school on 09.08.1972. Thereafter, he completed his graduation and was appointed as a regular graduate teacher on 14.08.1973. He was also granted the benefit of CAS-I and CAS-II during his service career. In his case, the department passed an order granting him the benefit of CAS-III w.e.f. 01.12.2001. Accordingly, his pay was fixed in the higher pay scale of Rs.7,450-13,000/-. He was also given actual benefit of the higher pay scale till his retirement on superannuation w.e.f. 31.03.2011. However, according to the department, he was wrongly granted the benefit of CAS-III and, therefore, a sum of Rs.76,731/- which according to the department was overpayment of salary, was recovered from his retiral benefits. He also places heavy reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in case of Amarendra Bhattacharjee (supra).

4. The department has filed replies. Stand taken by the department is that both the teachers got the benefit of higher pay scale when they were made graduate teachers from initial appointment as undergraduate teachers. They were, therefore, entitled to benefit of CAS-I and CAS-II only which was granted to them from due dates. The department is, however, unable to distinguish the case of the petitioners from that of Amarendra Bhattacharjee (supra) decided by the Division Bench. In fact, in an affidavit dated 28.06.2018 filed by Smti. Uma Debbarma, Under Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of School Education, it is stated that at one stage a proposal was moved before the Finance Department for approval for providing the similar benefits to these teachers also. In another affidavit dated 09.02.2018 filed by one Sri Nepal Kanti Chakraborty, Accou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top