2026:THC:745 TRHC010009692026 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA W.P.(C) 369/2026 Sayantika Choudhury ----Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Tripura & 3 others . ----Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. GA BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD Order 18/06/2026 Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard P. Gautam, learned senior GA appearing for the respondents. 2. By means of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “ (i) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order or direction/directions shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to issue Survival Certificate of Lt. Sujit Das, who passed away on 03.08.2024; (ii) Make the rules absolute; (iii) Call for records; (iv) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon’ble High Court considered fit and proper.” 3. It is the case of the petitioner, that her father, Sujit Das, expired on 03.08.2024 subsequent to which she, by an application approached the respondents for issuance of Survival Certificate in the month of January, 2025, but the said application was rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner in the month of May, 2025 re-applied for obtaining the Survival Certificate, but there was no communication from the office of the respondents. 2026:THC:745 TRHC010009692026 Lastly, the petitioner submitted her representation dated 04.11.2025 to the respondents with a prayer for issuance of the Survival Certificate of her father. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was no objection from any corner or anyone regarding non- issuance of the Survival Certificate. It is further submitted that though all the documents required for issuance of the said Certificate are available with the respondents but, without any justification her representation for issuance of the Survival Certificate has not been considered as yet, and thereby she has sought for intervention of this Court. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has not raised any objection to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. In pursuance of the notice dated 13.11.2025 issued by the respondent No. 3, hearing was called for on 19.11.2025, and the petitioner participated in the hearing, but no steps for issuance of the survival certificate has been initiated by the respondents. From the record it is also evident that none has raised any objection towards issuance of such Survival Certificate. This court is governed by the principle of justice, equity and good conscious. Needless to say, the petitioner also approached the respondents by her representation raising her grievances, but the same has not been disposed of as yet. 2026:THC:745 TRHC010009692026 7. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondents shall act in accordance with law, if required, the respondents are at liberty to call for objection, if any, from any corner and thereafter issue the Survival Certificate in favour of the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed preferable within a period of 4(four) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 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: 2026.06.19 14:06:23 -04'00'