Subhash Sutradhar vs State Of Tripura And Ors

By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

"Under the circumstances stated above, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed for that this Hon'ble Court would be graciously pleased to:-

i. Issue notice upon the Respondents.

ii. Call for the records.

iii. Issue Rule calling upon the Respondent to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be consider for appointment

in a Technical Post viz. Master craftsman/Examiner(handicrafts) w.e.f. the date of appointment of Sri Haricharan Das along with all financial Benefits under the Respondent Corporation.

iv. And after hearing the parties be pleased to make the ruleabsolute.

AND/OR

Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper

AND/OR

For this act of kindness your humble Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray."

Heard Mr. Arijit Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. Mangal Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State respondents.

The facts of the case, in short, is that the petitioner was first appointed to the post of Office Assistant on Fixed Pay Basis against regular sanction post in the erstwhile Tripura Apex Weavers' Cooperative Society Limited(sponsored by the Government of Tripura) on 12.08.1991. The engagement was concurred by the Finance Department, Government of Tripura on 12.08.2002 under order No.513/Fin(G)/2002(Annexure-2 to the writ petition). The service of the petitioner was regularized in the scale of pay of Rs.5,310-24,000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.1,800/-, PB-2, against the post of Office/Sales Assistant instead of handicrafts related technical post under the establishment of Tripura Handloom & Handicrafts Development Corporation Ltd.(for short, THHDC Ltd.). Accordingly, the petitioner joined to the said post on 18.01.2013. The said Apex Weavers' Cooperative Society Ltd. (for short, Apex Ltd.) was merged with the THHDC Ltd. and the staffs of Apex Ltd. were absorbed under THHDC Ltd. on such merger.

The petitioner has made several representations to the respondents to absorb him in any technical post, namely Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts) with effect from the date of appointment of Sri Haricharan Das along with all financial benefits under the respondents-Corporation. Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has the essential qualification to be absorbed in any technical post/examiner under the respondents.

On the other hand, Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. has submitted that the petitioner was never appointed against any technical post, namely Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts). There are two posts, one post relating to Examiner(Handicrafts) and another post is Master Craftsman and for the purpose of appointment to the said posts, the essential qualification prescribed under Recruitment Rules is that the candidate must possess the decree in fine/commercial art of a recognized university/institution with 5(five) years practical experience in the field or diploma in fine/commercial art of a recognized institution with 7(seven) years practical experience in the field. Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. contends that the petitioner has no such requisite qualification as prescribed in the Recruitment Rules. Drawing my attention to the qualification as mentioned in the writ petition Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. has submitted that the petitioner has possessed the degree of B.A., Special B.A. and five years diploma in Drawing & Painting from Tripura University and Government College of Art & Crafts under Department of Education, Government of Tripura, which do not fall under the prescribed education qualification required for the post of Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts). As such, there is no scope for appointment of the petitioner to the post of Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts), even though he had in his credit higher qualifications. It is further submitted that when the said post is filled up through the process of public employment, the petitioner may take part in the selection process, if he is otherwise eligible for the said post.

Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsels appearing for the parties to the lis, I have gone through the Recruitment Rules again. Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel has emphasized that the petitioner has possessed diploma in fine/commercial art from a recognized institution and he has seven years practical experience in the field, which is the essential qualification in terms of clause 5 of the Recruitment Rules for the post of Examiner(Handicrafts) or Master Craftsman. In support of the fact that the petitioner has seven years practical experience, Mr. Bhowmik has drawn my attention to an office order dated 01.09.2011, wherein it is stated that the petitioner being Office Assistant under THHDC Ltd. was working at Design Extension Centre, Indranagar, Agartala and he was further assigned to look after the Handicrafts Museum. Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel has further drawn my attention to other certificates also. In some of the certificates I find that he was certified to be qualified in wood and bamboo carvings.

On the other hand, Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. has submitted that these certificates do not reflect that the petitioner has been discharging his duties as an artisan required for fulfilling the criteria laid down in clause 5 of the Recruitment Rules. Mr. Debbarma has further submitted that the State-respondents had issued a Notification dated 12.08.2013 wherein a proviso was inserted in the principal Recruitment Rules which is reproduced here-in-below:-

"Provided that for the purpose of sub-rule while counting the required period of service, the fixed pay period of service rendered by an employee, who was recruited on fixed pay basis keeping the regular scale posts in abeyance and after observing all required formalities including adherence to the provision of the concerned Service or Recruitment Rules, shall be taken into consideration."

To controvert the statement, Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was granted regular pay scale in the post of Office Assistant.

After perusal of the records, I do not find that the petitioner has been working as Master Craftsman/ Examiner(Handicrafts). The Court is bound to follow the Recruitment Rules framed to fill up any post under the respondents. It is for the respondents to decide whether the petitioner has rendered his duties to make him suitable for the post of Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts). This Court will not examine under what circumstances those certificates were issued in favour of the petitioner.

However, the instant writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The petitioner shall submit a fresh application stating the nature of his service, qualifications and the tenure of his service for the post he is claiming.

(ii) The respondents after receipt of the said representation shall dispose of the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such application from the petitioner.

(iii) This Court hopes and trusts that if the petitioner fulfills the essential qualification and there is scope to permanently absorb him to the post of Master Craftsman/Examiner(Handicrafts), then, it may be considered in accordance with law.