2026:THC:687 TRHC010008802026 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) 347/2026 Sri Sudhir Chandra Paul ----Petitioner(s) Versus Agartala Municipal Corporation ----Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Ray Barman, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Bhaumik, Advocate BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD Order 21/05/2026 Heard Mr. A. Ray Barman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. By means of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “Issue writ directing the Respondent-AMC: (i) To execute the 99 years Lease Agreement with the petitioner; (ii) To allow the petitioner front entrance door of the allotted shop room; (iii) To allow the petitioner to display sign board in front of the shop room; (iv) To allow the petitioner to take electric connection in his name with separate electric metre; (v) To allow the petitioner to park his two wheeler vehicle inside the AMC complex; (vi) And not to disturb the petitioner regarding the opening and closing time of the shop for running his business.” 3. It is the case of the petitioner-Company, that ib 30.04.1992, by dint of lottery the petitioner got allotment of a shop room in the ground floor at the multistoried building at Akhaura Road (Lenin Sarani), Jackson Gate, Agartala, by the respondent-AMC. Out of a dispute regarding possession of the shop premise with the AMC, earlier the petitioner filed a writ Page 2 petition being WP(C) 242 of 2006 and as per direction of this High Court vide Order dated 30.04.2014, the asked the petitioner to take possession of the room. It is further case of the petitioner that till date the respondent-AMC has not executed any lease deed for 99 years with the petitioner though signature of the petitioner was obtained on a Lease Agreement in respect of room No. A-1(ground floor) measuring 174.73 sq. ft., and is not allowing the petitioner to use the front entrance of his shop and also creating serious obstacle in running his business. It is further case of the petitioner that he has approached the respondent-AMC time and again and ultimately submitted his representation dated 17.07.2025, but till date the same remained un-responded by the respondent-AMC. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that presently the petitioner is using the backdoor of the shop premise to run his business and due to the non-co-operation of the AMC, the petitioner is unable to run his business using the front door of the business which is causing serious hindrance in running his business. It is also submitted that since the signature of the petitioner was obtained on the Lease Agreement, it is the duty of the respondent-AMC to execute the said Lease Deed. It is further submitted that the respondent-AMC has put their deaf ear to the requests made by the petitioner verbally and his representation was regretted and thereby he has sought for intervention of this Court. Page 3 5. Mr. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-AMC has submitted that since Touji has been given to the petitioner thus there is no requirement for executing any Lease Deed 6. On perusal of the record, it is seen that the petitioner was allotted Touji on 30.04.2014 for a shop room measuring 174.73 sq.ft. at the multistoried building at Akhaura Road (Lenin Sarani), Jackson Gate, Agartala. It is also on record that the petitioner has made his representation in the year 2025 and thereafter it is not on record that the petitioner has further approached the respondent-AMC. Since 2025 the petitioner was in slumber, and on this ground of delay and laches, the petitioner is likely to be barred from any consideration. However, this Court is taking a lenient view on to the matter. This court is governed by the principle of justice, equity and good conscious. Needless to say, the petitioner approached the respondents by his representation, which has not been disposed of with reasoned order, and thus, this had caused serious prejudice to the petitioner 7. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner shall submit a fresh representation to the respondent-AMC expressing his grievances alongwith all required documents within a period of 2(two) weeks from today. Thereafter, the respondent-AMC shall dispose of the said representation of the petitioner in accordance with the procedure recognized under the act and Page 4 rules of AMC, by a reasoned order communicating the same to the at the earliest. With the above directions the instant writ petition is disposed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed. JUDGE SAIKAT KAR Digitally signed by SAIKAT KAR Date: 2026.05.21 19:01:53 -04'00'