Sukla Ghosh vs State Of Tripura And Ors

1) Heard Mr. Samar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents.

2) This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner, being wife of the deceased employee, has sought for a direction upon the respondents to provide her a suitabe job under Die-in-Harness scheme as applicable in the State of Tripura.

3) The fact of the case is that the husband of the petitioner was appointed as Daily Rated Worker (Group-D) vide order dated 12.11.2013, issued by the Directorate of Health Services. The husband of the petitioner had joined as DRW (Group-D) on 19.08.2014, which is evident from Annexure-4 to the writ petition. However, after few days of his joining as DRW under the respondents, the husband of the petitioner died on 13.04.2015.

4) Mr. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-wife has submitted that the wife being the legal heir of the deceased employee is entitled to be provided with a suitable job under Die-in-Harness scheme.

5) Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. has submitted that the scheme of Die-in-Harness as prevalent in the State of Tripura does not permit the legal heir of deceased employee to be provided with a job. He has drawn my attention to the memorandum dated 6th August, 2010, wherein it is stated that the benefits of Die-in-Harness scheme will be extended to the dependants of DRW along with other Casual workers/Fixed pay workers, whose names have appeared in the data prepared by the Finance Department for regularization and before issue of formal order of regularization as employee concerned expired.

6) A bare perusal of the memorandum dated 6th August, 2010, it becomes apparent that to claim a person to be regularized, his name must be entered in the data which is to be prepared by the Finance Department.

7) For the sake of convenience, the said memorandum is recapitulated herein below:-

"GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA GENERAL ADMINISTARATION(PERSONNEL TRAINING) DEPARTMENT

No.F.1(3)-GA(P&T)/99 Dated, Agartala, the 6th August, 2010

MEMORANDUM

Subject:- Providing employment to the dependents of deceased Daily Rated Worker(DRW), Contingent employee, Casual Worker and Fix-pay worker whose names appeared in the Data prepared by the Finance Department for regularization.

This Department's Memorandum of even number dated 9th January, 2009 was issued in connection with extending benefit of Government job under Die-in-harness scheme to the dependants of deceased DRW/Contingent employees only. Now, it has been decided by the Government that similar benefit will also be extended to the dependents of Casual worker/Fixed pay workers, whose names have appeared in the data prepared by the Finance Department for regularization and before issue of formal order of regularization the employee concerned expired.

This is issued in partial modification of the Department Memorandum of even number dated 9th January, 2009 on obtaining concurrence from the Finance Department vide U.O. No.381/Fin9G)/10 dated 22.06.2010, Therefore, the Memorandum No.F(3)-GA(P&T)99 dated 9th January, 2009 shall stand modified w.e.f. 09.01.2009.

All Departments/Heads of Departments are, therefore, requested to follow the aforesaid instruction strictly.

By order of the Governor

Sd/-

(R.P. Datta) Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tripura."

8) It is observed by this Court that the husband of the petitioner was just appointed as Daily Rated Worker vide order dated 12th November, 2013 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) and he joined on duty on 19.08.2014. The husband of the petitioner died on 13.04.2015.

9) Mr. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has fairly submitted that his name was not entered in the data which was prepared by the Finance Department for regularization.

10) Be that as it may, this Court cannot over-step the policy decision of the Govt. of Tripura which was taken by memorandum dated 06.08.2010. Consequently, this is not a fit case to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

11) With the above observation, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.