Tripura High Court
WA/102/2025 of Sri Anjan Das Vs The State of Tripura and Ors. on 25 November 2025
OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WA 102 of 2025 Sri Anjan Das …….Appellant(s) Versus The State of Tripura and others ……..Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dilip Chandra Nath, Advocate Mr. Anupam Pal, Advocate Mr. Saugat Datta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Gautam, Sr.
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WA 102 of 2025
Sri Anjan Das
…….Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Tripura and others
……..Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s)
: Mr. Dilip Chandra Nath, Advocate
Mr. Anupam Pal, Advocate
Mr. Saugat Datta, Advocate
For Respondent(s)
: Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. G.A.
Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharya, G.A.
HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
25.11.2025
When the case is called, Mr. A. Pal, learned counsel appears on behalf of the appellant. None appears on behalf of the respondents.
The present writ appeal has been filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) Admit this Writ Appeal,
ii) Call for the relevant records, pertaining to the impugned Order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure-3 supra), passed in WP(C) No 262 of 2024,
iii) After hearing the parties, in terms of the GROUNDS set forth above, be pleased to quash/set aside the impugned Order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure-3 supra), passed in WP(C) No 262 of 2024, and thereafter, allow this Writ Appeal as well as the Writ Petition;
iv) And pass any other Order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper for ends of justice”
It is seen from record that the very writ petition which was filed before this Court is the one without any maintainability as there is no prayer challenging any impugned proceedings or impugned action. In view of the same, without going into the issue on the point whether the learned Single Judge has rightly adjudicated the case or not on the preliminary issues, this Court is not convinced the manner in which the said writ petition has been filed and as a sequel, the writ appeal is also filed.
In view of the same, this Court has no hesitation to say that the writ petition and as well as the present writ appeal both need to be dismissed.
However, at this juncture, learned counsel for the appellant seeks for a liberty to file a fresh writ petition by challenging the impugned proceedings.
Thus, considering the request made by the learned counsel for the appellant, liberty is granted to the appellant to file writ petition afresh. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel, miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall also stand closed.
S. Datta Purkayastha, J.
Dr. T. Amarnath Goud, J.
Sabyasachi. G. SABYASACHI GHOSH Digitally signed by SABYASACHI GHOSH Date: 2025.11.26 16:55:48 +05'30'