HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
T. AMARNATH GOUD, J.
Smt. Gita Rani Banik - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tripura and ors. – Respondent
WP(C) NO.603 OF 2024
Decided on : 09-01-2025
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition seeking determination of last basic pay and pensionary benefits - The court addressed the issues of pay fixation and pension benefits based on previous judgments and orders, specifically referencing WP
(C) No. 50 of 2019 and WA No. 37 of 2020. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Legal Principle - The court emphasized that the subject matter was already covered by prior judgments, establishing that the respondents must refix the pay without recovering excess amounts. (Paras 2-3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought relief to determine the last basic pay and pensionary benefits, disputing the erroneous determination of pay by the respondents.
Findings of Court:
The court disposed of the writ petition in light of previous judgments, ordering the respondents to refix the pay and set aside the impugned order.
Issues: The main issues were the determination of last basic pay and pensionary benefits based on prior court judgments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that since the matter was covered by earlier judgments, the respondents are obligated to refix the pay without recovery of excess amounts.
Result: Writ petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
This present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-
“1. Issue notice upon the Respondents,
2. Call for the records,
3. (a) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the last basic pay of the Petitioner shall not be determined upon deduction of the one increment extended in favour of the Petitioner vide Office Order No. 187 dated 21.11.2009 issued pursuant to clarification at point no. 3 of the Memo dated 14.09.2009 issued by the Finance Department, Govt. of Tripura as per the judgment and order dated 11.07.2019 passed in W.P (C) No. 50 of 2019 as upheld by the judgment and order dated 25.11.2022 passed in W.A No. 37 of 2020.
AND
(b) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the last basic pay of the Petitioner shall not be determined considering that the Petitioner has been extended with the benefit of ACP II and ACP III on 13.02.2009 and 13.02.2017 respectively.
AND
(c) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the pensionary benefits and other retiral benefits including the 25% death cum retirement gratuity and the arrears thereof shall not be released in favour of the Petitioner upon determination of the last basic pay of the Petitioner in terms of the prayers (a) and (b) above.
AND
(d) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the letter dated 6th December, 2022 and the Pension Payment Order bearing no. PEN- 2/AGARTALA/1/1022044152/17/P/22/10/6004259 1 dated 30.01.2023 issued by the Respondent No. 5 & 6 erroneously determining the last basic pay of the Petitioner as Rs. 53,800 and releasing the pension and other retiral benefits on the said erroneous determination of last basic pay shall not be set aside and quashed.
IV. And after hearing the parties be pleased to make the rule absolute.
AND/OR Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper.
2. Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appears on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appears for the State-respondent and Mr. N. Majumder, learned counsel appears for respondents No.5 and 6.
3. When the case is called, it is represented by both sides that the subject matter involved in this present writ petition is already covered by the Judgments of this Court dated 11.07.2019 and 25.11.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 50 of 2019 and WA No. 37 of 2020 respectively. In pursuance of the same, the respondents shall make refixation of the pay, and, in terms of the orders, the excess amount already paid shall not be recovered. Considering the said submission, this present writ petition is accordingly disposed of as covered by Judgments of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 50 of 2019 and WA No. 37 of 2020 .
In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside, and the respondents shall take steps accordingly.
4. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any also stands closed.
The court mandated the refixation of the petitioner's pay and pension benefits in accordance with prior judgments, prohibiting recovery of excess amounts.
Recovery of pension benefits must comply with established legal frameworks, and retrospective adjustments cannot occur unless timely corrected as per governing rules.
A demand notice seeking recovery of pensionary benefits is legally unsustainable when it directly contradicts a final judicial determination by the highest court affirming the entitlement to such pay....
Withholding gratuity post-retirement without notice or opportunity to contest alleged incorrect pay fixation is impermissible and deemed harsh.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.