Cancellation of land mutation during ongoing civil disputes violates jurisdiction and undermines judicial proceedings.

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

[1] Heard Mr. Samrat Kar Bhowmik, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. E.L. Darlon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned Advocate General and Mr. P. Gautam, learned Sr. G.A. appearing for the official respondents No.1, 2 & 3. Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. L. Debbarma, is also present on behalf of unofficial respondent No.4.

[2] This present petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:

“(i) Issue notice upon the Respondents.

(ii) Call for the records.

(iii) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the impugned order dated 27-02-2025(Annexure-19) passed by the Respondent No.2 i.e, District Collector and Magistrate, Agartala, West Tripura in connection with the Review case no. 55 of 2025 and the whole review proceedings shall not be quashed and set aside.

(iv) Issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the impugned suo moto proceeding U/S 95 of TLR & LR Act, 1960 vide Case No. 179 of 2025 initiated by respondent no 2, D.M & Collector, West Tripura, Agartala, vide order dated 18-02-2025 (ΑΝΝEXURE-17) in connection with the Review case no 55 of 2025 and the whole review proceedings shall not be quashed and set aside.

(v) Issue Rule calling upon all the respondents in general and respondent no 2 in person to show cause as to under what authority he deliberately violated the order status quo dated 05-08-2017 in c/w case no. Civil Misc(Inj) 34 of 2017 arising out of TS (CC) 01 of 2017 passed by Ld. Civil Judge, Sr. Div Court No: 3, Agartala (Annexure-9) and initiated the impugned suo moto proceeding U/S 95 of TLR & LR Act, 1960 vide Case No. 179 of 2025 by passing the impugned orders dated 18-02-2025 (ANNEXURE- 17) and impugned order dated 27-02-2025(Annexure-19).

(vi) Issue Rule calling upon all the respondents in general and respondent no 2 in person to show cause as to under what authority he deliberately violated the order status quo dated 05-08-2017 in c/w case no: Civil Misc (Inj.) 34 of 2017 arising out of TS (CC) 01 of 2017 passed by Ld.Civil Judge, Sr. Div. Court No: 3, Agartala (Annexure-9) thereby causing immense mental pain and agony to the petitioner and why appropriate proceedings /writ should not be initiated/issued against him and why respondents in general and respondent no 2 in person should not be liable to pay compensation/cost if ordered by this Hon'ble Court.

(vii) And after hearing the parties be pleased to make the rule absolute. ……….................”

[3] The case of the petitioner in brief is that in the year 2002, the he purchased two plots of land, total land measuring 0.0564 Acres, of Mouja Agartala Sheet No.3, in Hal Plot No.2045/2525 and 2046/2526 classified as Bastu (Nal) by Sale Deed 1-3679. Dated 26/04/2002 from Smt. Niyati Bhattacharjee, W/O Lt. Jiban Chakraborty. Smt. Eliza Chakraborty, Smt. Lopamudra Roy and Smt Nayana Chakraborty, all D/O late Jiban Chakraborty. It is contended that in the said registered sale deed, there are two schedules of land namely Schedule A (homestead land measuring 2 Gandas 1 Kara 1 Kranta 19 Dhurs). Schedule B (Pathway) measuring 8 feet in breadth and 46-6" feet in length, i.e. land measuring 1 Kara 2 Krantas 3 dhurs, and the total land including the path way stands as 2 Gandas 3 Karas 1 Kranta 2 Dhurs i.e. 0.0564 Acres. It is further contended that subsequently, by virtue of three separate deeds, one from Smt Ranjana Chakraborty alias Smt. Ranjana Chakraborty (Choudhury), W/O- Sri Manik Lal Coudhury, alias Sri Mani Lal Choudhury, through her constituted power of attorney namely Sri. Chunilal