AGARTALA, India, May 16 -- Tripura High Court issued the following order/judgement on April 13:
Learned Counsel, Mr. Koomar Chakraborty is present for the applicant.
Learned G.A., Mr. K. N. Bhattacharyya is present for the respondents.
Heard Learned Counsel for the applicant who at this stage submitted that the applicant has filed this writ petition seeking certain reliefs and along with the writ petition this I.A. is filed for staying operation of the impugned memorandum dated 09.01.2026 and 17.03.2026 (Annexure-16 and Annexure-18 respectively) of the writ petition till disposal of the writ petition.
It was further submitted that the applicant joined in the service under Directorate of Higher Education on fixed pay basis in the year 2007. Thereafter, in the year 2010 he was selected as Senior Inspector Electronics under Directorate of Industries & Commerce and he was given regular pay scale in the year 2015 by the authority (Annexure-10). Thereafter, by memo dated 01.10.2020 he was given MACP-1 on completion of 10 years of service. Thereafter, by memo dated 09.01.2026 it was informed that the applicant has given the benefit without the approval or consultation of the Head of the Department and his MACP-1 was withdrawn and thereafter by another memo dated 17.03.2026 it was informed that he has withdrawn Rs.1,59,584/- in access and accordingly, by the said memo (Annexure-18) he was asked to refund the said amount. So, under compelling circumstances, the applicant has filed the writ petition seeking the reliefs for granting him MACP-1 and MACP-2 with further relief to the respondents not to give effect of said memo dated 09.01.2026 (Annexure-16) and 17.03.2026 (Annexure-18).
Learned G.A. appeared and submitted that the matter requires to be examined and fairly submitted that opportunity may be given to the respondents to filed counter-affidavit to countenance the claim of the applicant.
I have heard both the sides and perused the documents submitted by the applicant along with the writ petition. It appears that after examining all the relevant documents the order dated 01.10.2020 (Annexure-14) was issued by the respondent-authority. Now by another memo, i.e. 09.01.2026 it was informed that the applicant has withdrawn excess amount and his MACP was wrongly given and by further memo dated 17.03.2026 he was asked to pay the overdrawn amount.
Admittedly, the applicant is a Group-C employee. So, it appears to this Court that the direction for refund of amount may cause undue hardships to the applicant at this stage, since the applicant has come across a considerable period of his service. Furthermore, there appears no fault on the part of the applicant to draw the excess amount.
So, considering all, till disposal of the writ petition the respondent-authority be restrained from giving effect to the said memo dated 09.01.2026 (Annexure-16) and 17.03.2026 (Annexure-18).
With this observation, this present I.A. stands disposed of.
A copy of this order be supplied to Learned G.A. in course of the day for information and necessary action.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
