HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) NO.102 OF 2025 Smt. Shikha Rani Das Sarkar and ors. Vs. The State of Tripura and ors. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD Present: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Debjyoti Debnath, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee, G.A. Mr. K. De, Addl. G.A. Mr. B. Majumder, Deputy SGI. 28.02.2025 Order Heard Mr. D. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as Mr. K. De, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State- respondents, and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Deputy SGI., appearing for the respondent-Railway. 2. The brief facts of this case are that respondent No.2, i.e., the L.A. Collector, West Tripura, initiated the acquisition of land belonging to various landowners, including the petitioners, for the respondent No.3, N.F. Railway, for the construction of a railway line. However, the L.A. Collector neither served any notice of acquisition nor issued any notice of possession or award in favor of the petitioners. In this regard, respondent No.3, N.F. Railway, began construction work on the petitioners' land by erecting fences and pillars around it. The petitioners submitted an application before respondent No.2 on 09.12.2019, requesting a halt to the earth-filling of their ‘Jote’ land, but no action was taken. Finally, the petitioners served an Advocate’s notice to respondent No.2 on 27.04.2021, with a copy sent to respondent No.3. However, no reply was received regarding the said notice. 3. Aggrieved by the non-responsiveness of the respondents, the petitioners have filed this writ petition before this Court, seeking the following reliefs: “i. Admit this petition and call for record from the office of respondent No.2. ii. Issue Notice upon the respondents iii. After hearing both the parties give a direction to the respondent to survey the instant matter, provide award notices regarding the said acquisition and award adequate compensation regarding acquisition of the land of the petitioner. iv. Any other relief/relieves as your honour deems fit and proper. 4. Mr. D. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that his clients had served a legal notice dated 27.04.2021 to the respondents, which remained unattended. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted a representation dated 06.01.2025 before the respondents, but no action has been taken. Due to the inaction of the respondents, the petitioners have approached this Court for relief. 5. Heard and perused the evidence on record. 6. In view of above and having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the matter is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners, in accordance with law, facts and rights be decided as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3(three) months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Accordingly, the same is ordered. Further, it is made clear that whatever the decision is taken by the concerned respondents, the same may be communicated to the petitioners. 7. As a consequence, any stay, if in force, stands vacated. Any pending application(s), if any, also stand closed. JUDGE suhanjit RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SINGHA Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2025.02.28 13:39:35 +05'30'