Years of Injustice: Tripura's Reservation in Promotion Matter Still Languishes Despite 20 Years of Litigation

Jayanta Debnath

June 24, 2025

For nearly two decades, one of the most sensitive and consequential service-related legal battles in the state of Tripura, the Reservation in Promotion case has remained unresolved. This landmark case, which touches the careers, dignity, and retirement benefits of thousands of state government employees, is today a symbol of judicial delay, administrative indifference, and systemic exploitation. More than a dozen esteemed judges have since retired, multiple Advocate Generals and Law Secretaries have come and gone, yet the matter continues to await a final judgment from the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

The inordinate delay is not merely a legal oversight, it is a violation of constitutional rights, a breach of administrative accountability, and a denial of justice to those who have served the state faithfully.

The case began in 2005, with WP(C) No. 321/2005 filed in the High Court of Tripura, Agartala, by seven senior Executive Engineers from the PWD department:

They are- Sri Biplab Paul, Sri Sukumal Bhattacharjee, Sri Ashim Chakraborty, Sri Tapan Roy, Sri Manik Lal Sarkar, Sri Asit Bhowmik, Sri Amitava Gupta.

Their petition challenged the policy and process of reservation in promotions being implemented in violation of constitutional safeguards and norms set by landmark judgments like M. Nagaraj v. Union of India.

Over the years, additional related writ petitions were filed: WP(C) No. 109/2011 (by SDMs like Sri Pankaj Chakraborty and others). WP(C) No. 189/2011 (by Sri Jayanta Chakraborty and others). WP(C) No. 124/2012 (by General Officers & Employees Welfare Society and individual TPS officers).

The matters culminated in a historic judgment by the Hon’ble High Court of Tripura, then led by Justice Dipak Gupta, justice UB Saha and justice SC Das, which directed that promotions must be subject to compliance with the constitutional requirements laid down in the Nagaraj case i.e., collection of quantifiable data to justify reservation in promotions. But Tripura government, unhappy with the three bench judges led by Justice Dipak Gupta’s order, in 2015, the State of Tripura filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging the High Court’s judgment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court admitted the matter and directed:

'In the meantime, the parties will maintain status quo. However, the data collating the information as postulated in Nagaraj’s case may continue.'

Despite this clear directive, the Government of Tripura, it is alleged, has not complied with it in letter or spirit. Reports suggest that ad-hoc promotions have been regularly made without conducting the requisite data collection or adherence to the constitutional provisions for reservation in promotions. These actions have been flagged by none other than the Accountant General (AG) of Tripura, who reportedly refused to accept such ad-hoc promotions for pension and retirement benefit calculations.

This has led to severe financial losses and career stagnation for hundreds of retired employees who, even after decades of service, were denied their legitimate due.

Inside sources suggest a disturbing trend, the case has morphed into a revenue generating tool for certain senior officer's and employee bodies leadership, who allegedly collect crores of rupees as regular 'subscriptions' from members under the pretense of legal advocacy, without pushing for meaningful progress in court.

Further, it is claimed that a section of officers who deal with the related files are deliberately not advising the Hon’ble Chief Minister Dr. Manik Saha or Chief Secretary J.K. Sinha truthfully on the matter. Their inaction, witting or unwitting, perpetuates this cycle of delay and denies rightful promotions and benefits to deserving officers.

These officers’ negligence or worse, manipulation, erodes the trust of thousands of public servants in the fairness of governance and the legal system.

Notably, there is no legal injunction or restriction preventing the Government of Tripura from granting regular promotions to its officers and employees. The legal framework, including service rules and constitutional provisions, allows for time-bound, merit-based, and regular promotions unless specifically stayed or barred by a court order in a particular case. However, as of now, no such general restriction or injunction exists in the context of Tripura's promotion policy.

Across the country, almost all state governments follow a regular promotion system based on established norms like seniority, merit, ACR (Annual Confidential Report), or DPC (Departmental Promotion Committee) recommendations. Officers and staff are promoted to higher positions through regular departmental procedures.

Importantly, no other state in India is known to follow a policy of granting ad hoc promotions citing court cases or pending verdicts from the Supreme Court, as is currently practiced in Tripura.

Ad Hoc Promotion Practice in Tripura stands out as the only state where promotions are largely given on an ad hoc basis, with a regular caveat stating that such promotions are subject to the final outcome of the Supreme Court verdict. This has created uncertainty, demoralization, and legal ambiguity for the affected employees. Ad hoc promotions often lack financial or service-related benefits and can be reversed, causing career stagnation.

It has been alleged by many affected officers and employees and observers that the government is not being properly advised by its legal experts. There appears to be a lack of clear legal interpretation and assertive action in ensuring regular promotions based on merit and eligibility. This has led to:

1. Unnecessary delay in filling higher posts through regular promotions

2. Unfair stagnation in the careers of deserving officers and employees

3. Loss of administrative efficiency due to prolonged uncertainty

4. Undermining of morale in the state bureaucracy.

In view of the above, it is imperative that the Government of Tripura reconsiders its current approach and resumes regular promotions in a time-bound and rule-based manner, aligning with the practices of other Indian states. The state’s legal experts must proactively clarify and support this move, especially in the absence of any Supreme Court directive specifically prohibiting such promotions.

Surprisingly, despite the magnitude of this issue, no petition has been filed by the Government of Tripura or any employee body for early hearing in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The silence from the state's legal machinery and responsible departments is deafening. If governments in other states can seek daily hearings in time on sensitive or politically significant matters, why has the Tripura Government not made a similar request yo Supreme Court for this case that affects the lives of thousands?

This is a clarion call to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and the Hon’ble Judges of the Supreme Court, justice delayed here is justice denied on an unprecedented scale.

(Writer Jayanta Debnath is a Senior Journalist and Editor Tripurainfo.com, a concerned voice for truth, accountability, and justice. This is not merely a write-up, rather an appeal to Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Chief Minister Dr. Manik Saha, Hon’ble Chief Secretary J.K. Sinha, and esteemed Judges of the Supreme Court of India to address the issue urgently)

আরও পড়ুন...