Minati Rani Paul vs State Of Tripura And Ors

Heard Mr. P. K. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents.

The petitioner has urged this court to provide him appointment under Die-in-harness Scheme or to consider his appointment as DRW considering his economic status on compassionate ground or in terms of the judgment and order dated 11.01.2018 delivered in W.P.(C) No.528 of 2017 as earlier filed by the petitioner.

There is no dispute that by the judgment dated 11.01.2018 delivered in W. P.(C) No.528 of 2017 [Minati Rani Paul (Dey) vs. State of Tripura and others], this court having considered the attending circumstances and the prayer of the petitioner had observed as follows:

"7. Since, the doctrine of laches may not be invoked in the present circumstances when the court has directed to pass a reasoned order and the process had been continuing and the last communication was made in the exercise on 28.02.2017, even though the decision was communicated to the petitioner on 09.05.2012. While scrutinizing the records, this court has come across the following averments made by the respondents in paragraph 7, which is as under:

"However, the family of the deceased employee is entitled for financial assistance, as per Scheme, and the answering Respondents are ready to make payment of the same".

The said averment has been made in the reply but no reference has been made to the scheme which may be relevant for extending such financial assistance. This court, however, is of the view that, that can be treated as the undertaking by the respondents before this court and hence the respondents are directed to extend the financial assistance under the scheme meaning under the die-in-harness scheme, in lieu of employment, no other scheme can be applied in the present circumstances. That apart, the respondents are directed to consider the appointment of the petitioner as DRW, so that the family can sail over the financial crisis. Such exercise shall be made as the compassionate measure by the benevolent government. For this, the court is not inclined to stipulate any time frame. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the respondent no.2 immediately so that appropriate action may be taken. However, the financial assistance as has been undertaken by the respondents shall be made within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receiving a copy of this order."

The petitioner had placed that judgment before the respondents who according to their undertaking issued the sanction order for Rs.50,000/- as financial assistance to the petitioner, as the petitioner is not entitled to any engagement/appointment under the Die-in-harness Scheme for death of the husband of the petitioner.

Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. GA has confirmed this court that the said amount of Rs.50,000/- has been accepted by the petitioner. In this respect, the respondents have categorically stated that an amount of Rs.50,000/- has been transferred to the bank account of the petitioner by the Head of the Office i.e. The Executive Engineer (Mechanical), Department of Agriculture, Agartala. But the respondents have categorically stated that the petitioner cannot be appointed under the Die-in-harness Scheme inasmuch as for death of any DRW worker no such benefit can be extended to the person and such case cannot fall under the Die-in-harness Scheme. The respondents have produced the opinion of the Finance Department [Annexure-R/2 to the writ petition].

Having considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that no more relief can be granted to the petitioner. The respondents have discharged their undertaking by making payment of Rs.50,000/- in favour of the petitioner.

This writ petition stands disposed of without further direction.

There shall be no order as to costs.