S.C. Das, J.

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia, prayed for directing the respondents to issue occupancy certificate for the occupation of G + 5 storied building constructed at Shakuntala Road, Agartala along with formal approval/permission of the building plan in favour of the petitioner. Case of the Petitioner:

1.1 The petitioner, inter alia, stated in the writ petition as well as in the re-joinder affidavits dated 16.03.2012 and 15.06.2012 that the petitioner is a Company of repute and carrying on the business of Real Estate and Construction, all over the country including the State of Tripura. To set up a well equipped office, they purchased a plot of land at Shakuntala Road, Agartala within Agartala Municipal Council (for short, AMC) vide Sale-deed dated 19.01.2006, for the purpose of constructing a G+5 storied building thereon to accommodate their office purpose. After purchase of the land, they prepared a building plan, through an organization, namely Creative Forum Private Ltd., an authorized commissioned architect of Agartala Municipal Council and submitted the building plan to the AMC on 24.04.2006, with a request to accord permission thereto. AMC duly received the same but did neither approve nor reject the plan as submitted by the petitioner and was sitting over it. According to the provision prescribed under Section 125 of the Tripura Municipal Act, 1994 (for short, Municipal Act), the AMC was either to approve or reject the plan within 60 days from the date of submission of the plan failing which, it shall be deemed to have been approved by the Municipality. It is the further case of the petitioner, that they also made an appeal on 21.11.2006 to the Chairman of the Municipality under Rule 23 of the Tripura Building Rules, 2004 (for short, Rules of 2004) but no order was passed by the Chairman of the Municipality on such appeal. The Chairman was supposed to dispose the appeal within 30 days but that was not done. Since after repeated persuasion no response was received, the petitioner started construction as per the plan submitted to the Municipality presuming that the plan had been approved.

1.2. While the construction was in substantial progress, the petitioner received letter dated 24.04.2007 from the Assessor of Municipality (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) to take the following 3 steps to remove the defects:-

1. Parking provisions space should be shown minimum 39 nos of vehicles.

2. Rain water harvesting is mandatory for this construction as per Section 110 & Section 111 to be followed for insurance of the construction;

3. Area calculated and shown in the drawing is not proper.

1.3 In response to that letter, the petitioner requested the Municipality by writing letter dated 26.04.2007 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) that the petitioner will use the building as office and there will be no requirement of 39 nos. of car space and that, the petitioner may be allowed to have parking provision of 27 cars and to approve the plan. The petitioner complied with the requirement Nos. 2 and 3 as per letter dated 24.04.2007. Thereafter, by a letter dated 20.11.2007 with an enclosed copy of memorandum for the council of ministers dated 12.09.2007 (Annexure 7 to the writ petition), the petitioner was asked to submit technical clearance from some recognized institutions. Jadavpur University was also recognized by the AMC as such an institution, for according technical clearance. Accordingly, as approved by the Municipality, vide its letter dated 08.01.2010 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition), the petitioner obtained technical clearance from Jadavpur University and submitted the same to the Municipality along with letter dated 26.08.2009. Prior to the submission of the technical clearance from Jadavpur University, respondent No. 4, chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Municipality submitted a detailed report to the respondent No. 2 by a letter dated 22.03.2010 obser