WP(C)/560/2015 of TRIDIP BANIK Vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA and ORS on 18 December 2015

Party Name : TRIDIP BANIK Vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA & ORS

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA

Heard Mr. D. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.Chakraborty, learned Addl. G.A. for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3. It transpires that therespondents No. 1, 2 and 3 has made an undertaking in their written instruction asproduced by Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Addl. G.A. that in future whenever the scope oftraining in MRI etc. would be available the petitioner would be accommodated.Mr. D. Sarkar, learned counsel has submitted that the official respondents without followingany transparent guidelines are accommodating the persons at their whim.

After they are trained, the petitioner is apprehensive that they would be given financialbenefits, preference in the promotion or the upward movement in the service when, for nofault of the petitioner he would suffer. I find adequate substance in the submission of Mr.Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. But at the same time, the court cannot just take a legalistic view when the state is not having the required guidelines. Thesearrangements therefore are treated by this court as a transitional arrangement subject toformulation of the proper guidelines within a reasonable time in as much simply becausesomeone is posted in a far-flung area despite his all qualifications to get the training andthe higher position in the seniority list cannot be deprived from the training. There must bea transparent policy for sending the persons for training as the trained people may befavoured with some incentive in the form of financial benefits or they may be givenpreference in the matter of promotion or the movement to the higher scale or in giving theassignments with higher responsibilities or even posting. This apprehensions are thereforenot totally without any basis.

Having regard to the undertaking made before this court this court is disposing this writpetition in terms of the following directions on the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 that in futurethe junior Radiographers who have been sent for the training in CT scan/ MRI shall not begiven financial or service benefits depriving the petitioner or superseding his seniorityposition. Moreover, whenever the next opportunity would come the petitioner shall first beaccommodated for such training as already two juniors of the petitioner have been sent forsuch training. The records as produced by Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Addl. G.A. isreturned.

With this observation and direction this petition is allowed to the extent as indicated above.

There shall be no order as to costs.