Shyamali Roy Datta vs State of Tripura

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2022 Supreme(Tri) 236

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Shyamali Roy Datta & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Tripura & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) 724 of 2022
Decided On : 09-12-2022

Important Points

The retirement age for Anganwadi workers is upheld at 65 years, with reinstatement ordered pending Supreme Court clarification.

Subject

Employment Law - Retirement Age

Headnote

(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 and Article 21 - The petitioners, Anganwadi workers, were forced to retire at 60 years despite complaints regarding a 65-year retirement age. Court directed reinstatement pending Apex Court decision but denied arrears. (Paras 2-4)

(B) Employment - The case clarifies the retirement age of Anganwadi workers and compliance with a prior judgment regarding their service duration. (Paras 3-4)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were Anganwadi workers retired at 60 years, while they claimed the valid retirement age was 65 years as per a prior judgment. Respondents challenged this ruling before the Supreme Court.

Findings of Court:
Petitioners must be reinstated as Anganwadi workers in their respective centers within four weeks, but will not receive any arrears of pay.

Issues: The key issue was the lawful retirement age of Anganwadi workers and the application of an existing court judgment on this matter.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the petitioners should be reinstated based on the existing judgment regarding their retirement age, emphasizing the need for adherence until resolved by the Supreme Court.

Result: Writ petition allowed.

Advocates appeared:
A Debbarma, Advocate, Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate, P Roy Barman, Advocate, Kawsik Nath, Advocate, S Saha, Advocate

Table of Content
1. retirement age of anganwadi workers is contested. (Para 2)
2. petitioners argue for retirement at 65. (Para 3)
3. court directs reinstatement of petitioners. (Para 4)
4. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned GA assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 6 and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Deputy SGI appearing for respondent no. 7.

2. All the petitioners in this writ petition were working as Anganwadi workers under the respondents. The respondents had forced them to go on retirement on attaining the age of 60 years. It is the grievance of the petitioners that their retirement age is 65 years and the respondents most illegally had terminated them after attaining the age of 60 years.

3. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that Anganwadi workers would retire on attaining the age of 65 years and till they attain the said age, the services of such Anganwadi workers should not be disturbed in view of the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court.

4. Learned GA has submitted that the judgment of the Division Bench extending their services upto the age of 65 years is under challenge before the Supreme Court, but, considering the present situation, I direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners as Anganwadi workers in their respective centers within a period of 4(four) weeks from today. However, it is made clear that they would not be entitled to any arrears of pay. It is further made clear that such continuation of the service of the petitioners is subject to the decision of the Apex Court related to this issue.

5. With the above direction, the instant writ petition stands allowed and thus disposed.