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

2022 Supreme(Tri) 10

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Puspendu Palit - Appellant
Versus
Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd (Tsecl) & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 1100 of 2022
Decided On : 22-12-2022

Advocates appeared:
Sutapa Deb Barman, Advocate, A Debbarma, Advocate, P Roy Barman, Advocate, Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate, Kawsik Nath, Advocate, A Debbarma, Advocate

The court emphasized procedural fairness in the issuance of a notice regarding a medical reimbursement bill sanctioning.

Headnote:(A) Tripura State Electricity Corporation Act - Medical reimbursement bill sanctioning - The court addressed the procedural requirements for issuing notices and the responsibilities of the petitioner in ensuring service of notice. (Paras 2 - 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner seeks a sanction of a medical reimbursement bill from the respondents, with the court outlining steps for notice issuance.

Findings of Court:
The court requires notice for the parties and outlines procedural compliance for the petitioner.

Issues: The main issue is the sanctioning of the medical reimbursement bill and the need for proper notice issuance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness in requiring notice to be given to the respondents before further proceedings can occur.

Result: Notice issued, and the matter is to be listed again.

Table of Content
1. case of medical reimbursement sanctioning (Para 1)
2. issuing notice for respondents to show cause (Para 2)
3. procedural orders and timelines set by the court (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)

JUDGMENT

Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. De, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents-State.

2. This is a case of sanctioning of medical reimbursement bill. Issue notice calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a rule should not be issued as prayed for; and/or as to why such further order or other orders should not be passed as to this court may seem fit and proper.

3. Notice is made returnable on 02.02.2023.

4. Since Mr. De, learned Addl. GA appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondents-State, no formal notice is called for.

5. The petitioner is to take steps for causing service of notice upon the remaining respondents within a period of 3 (three) days by registered post with A/D.

6. List the matter on 02.02.2023.

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