Advocates:
['Mr A SENGUPTA', 'Mr ARIJIT BHOWMIK', '', 'S DEY', 'ANKAN TILAK PAUL']

Page 1 of 2

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_

WP(C) No.468 of 2021

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. A. Sengupta, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) :

Mr. A. Bhowmik, Advocate.

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

_O_ R_ D_ E_ R_

05/12/2022

Heard Mr. A. Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners. Also heard Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the

respondents.

The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

i. Admit the instant writ petition.

ii. Call for the records relevant from the custody of the respondents.

iii. Issue Rule calling upon the respondent to show cause as to why a

writ of certiorari and/or any other writ/writs in the nature thereof shall

not be issued directing the respondents for setting aside/quashing the

order dated 22.01.2021 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) passed by the

District Magistrate & Collector, Gomati District, Tripura, respondent

No.1 in Revenue case No. 36 of 2020 under Section 95 of the TLR&LR

Act, 1960.

iv. Issue Rule calling upon the respondent to show cause as to why a writ

of mandamus and/or any other writ/writs in the nature thereof shall not

be issued directing/mandating the respondent No.1 to allow mutation of

the pond and bank of pond, in question, in favour of the petitioners and

the respondents No.2 to 7.

v. Issue Rule calling upon the respondent to show cause as to why a writ

of certiorari and/or any other writ/writs in the nature thereof shall not

be issued directing the respondent No.1 to produce all the records in

connection with Revenue case No. 36 of 2020 under Section 95 of the

TLR&LR Act, 1960.

AND/OR

vi. After hearing the parties be pleased to make the rule absolute, issuing

direction to the respondents.

The case of the petitioners is that predecessor of the petitioners

and the predecessor of the private respondents are the owners of the pond and

bank of pond class of land, in question, by way of registered exchange deed

executed by the previous owners. The said exchange deeds were executed by

Page 2 of 2

the attorney of the original owners. The exchange deeds were registered before

the Sub-Registrar, Udaipur, Tripura. On the basis of the exchange deeds, many

plots in the name of Srish Chandra Bhowmik, predecessor of the petitioners

No.1 and 2 was recorded in his name in the Record of Right but, the plots

No.2238, 2239 of Mouza Palatana, Khatian No.790 was not recorded in his

name.

Due to the said reason, the petitioners applied for correction of

Record of Right incorporating their names in place of the names of the previous

owners but, the respondent No.1 without applying his mind dropped the

proceeding with a finding that there were insufficient deeds and documents for

recording the names of the petitioners and the private respondents in place of

the original owners.

In view of above, it reveals that the impugned order dated

22.01.2021 suffers from legal impediments and appreciation of facts. This

Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the matter is

remand back to the District Magistrate & Collector for fresh adjudication on

the legal issues. Thus, the respondents are directed to pass a reasoned order in

terms of the facts and legal position after hearing both the parties and this

exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible from the date of

receipt of the copy of this order and also communicate the decision to the

petitioners.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with the

above terms.

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

A. Ghosh