IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

A G A R T A L A

WP(C)No.608 of 2021

Smt. Supriya Chakraborty,

MRW (Group-C), Tripura University,

daughter of late Sisir Ranjan Chakraborty,

resident of Jogendranagar,

P.O. Jogendranagar, Agartala,

District : West Tripura

……… Petitioner(s)

– V e r s u s –

1. Tripura University,

A Central University,

represented

by

the

Registrar,

Tripura

University,

having office at Surjyamaninagar,

P.O. Surjyamaninagar, PIN : 799002,

Agartala, District : West Tripura

2. The Registrar,

Tripura University,

having his office at Surjyamaninagar,

P.O. Surjyamaninagar, PIN : 799022,

Agartala, District : West Tripura

…….. Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner (s)

:

Mr. T.D. Majumder, Sr. Adv.

Mr. T. Halam, Adv.

For the Respondent (s)

:

Mr. R. Datta, Adv.

Date of hearing & delivery of

: 21.12.2021

Judgment and Order

Whether fit for reporting

:

NO

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA

JUDGMENT & ORDER

Heard Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Halam,

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel

appearing for the respondents.

Page 2 of 6

2.

The facts are mostly undisputed. The petitioner was appointed as the Daily

Rated Worker [DRW] [Group-C] on 27.12.2005 [see Annexure-7 to this writ petition] on

purely temporary basis.

3.

Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has

submitted that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as her father

namely Sisir Ranjan Chakraborty died on 26.11.2005 in harness while he was working in

the Tripura University. Since such appointment, the petitioner has been discharging his

duties without blemish. On 09.08.2019, the petitioner made a representation to the Vice

Chancellor, Tripura University for her absorption in a regular post. The said representation

has not been disposed of. The petitioner has not been apprised of anything whether the

petitioner would be regularized or absorbed. According to the petitioner, there is a vacancy

in the post of Lower Division Clerk and the petitioner who has the educational and other

qualifications for appointment to that post. The petitioner has enclosed the recruitment

rules for the post of Lower Division Clerk with this writ petition [see Annexure-16 to the

writ petition]. But no positive action yielded from the end of the respondents. Hence, the

petitioner has urged this Court to direct the respondents to absorb her in the post of

Lower Division Clerk (LDC) following the instance of one Smt. Basanti Debbarma who had

been absorbed in the Group-C post under Die-in-Harness Scheme.

4.

Mr. Majumder, learned senior counsel has drawn our attention to the

memorandum dated 07.05.2007 whereby the particulars of DRW/Casual workers etc. were

collected by the University for examining the feasibility of regularization.

5.

Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted

that the petitioner does not have any indefeasible right to get regularization. In para-9 of

Page 3 of 6

the reply filed by the University-respondents, it has been stated that no record has been

produced by the petitioner that she had the typing speed of 30 words per minute as

required as essential qualification for recruitment to the post of Lower Division Clerk. That

apart, it has been asserted that there is no rule or scheme under the University for

regularisation of service of the employees working for a certain period or more than such

period and as a result, the petitioner cannot get any benefit as prayed for. But, as regards

absorption of Smti. Basanti Debbarma, the University-respondents do not have any

satisfactory reply.

6.

Having appreciated the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties,

this Court finds that at one point of time, the University-respondents had been exploring

the feasib