Tripura High Court
Party Name : Swaraswati Debnath & Ors vs The State Of Tripura & Ors on 3 January, 2017
Author: S.Talapatra
Bench: S.Talapatra
Case No :WP(C) 0001316/2016 Party Name : SWARASWATI DEBNATH & ORS Vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA & ORS THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA Heard Mr. SS Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. TD Majumder, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Competent Authority constituted under the National Highways Act,1956 (the Additional District Magistrate & Collector, South Tripura, Belonia) and Mr. Tanmoy Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing on instruction of Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondents, Union of India
Both these writ petitions being WP(C) 1315 of 2016 [Swaraswati Debnath & ors vs. State of Tripura & ors] and WP(C) 1316 of 2016 [Swaraswati Debnath & ors vs. State of Tripura & ors] are clustered for disposal by a common order as a common question has been raised in all these writ petitions relating to non-reference of their cases under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 for apportionment of award in connection with the LA case No. 27/STB/2015.
Mr. TD Majumder, learned Government Advocate, at the outset has taken leave of this court to file the affidavit in opposition by the respondent no.3, the Competent Authority constituted under the National Highways Act, 1956.
By means of these writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for direction to cause reference of the said LA case to the Principle Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956.
Mr. Majumder, learned Government Advocate having referred to the forwarding letter of the Competent Authority under No. F.F.12(51)-DM/S/LA/2012/4893 dated 15.12.2016 has submitted that the said LA case no. 27/STB/2015 has been referred to the Principal Civil Court of the original jurisdiction for apportionment of the award in serial No. 13 in LA case no. 27/STB/2015 and serial No. 12 in LA case no. 27/STB/2015. Thus, he contended that the writ petitions are now infructuous for the said action taken by the respondent no.3. Mr. SS Debnath, learned counsel has conceded to that proposition that the entire relief as prayed in the writ petitions has been granted by the respondent no. 3 who was supposed to refer the matter to the Principal Civil Court of the competent jurisdiction under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956.
In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of as infructuous. Registry is directed to place the copies of the affidavits in opposition filed by the respondent no.3 in respective files.
Download Date: 8-05-2017 15:05 1/1