Smt. Meri Kalai @ Mary Kalai vs The State of Tripura and 4 Ors.

Court
Tripura High Court

TRHC010016712026 2026:THC:1283

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA

WP(C) 684/2026

Smt. Meri Kalai @ Mary Kalai , wife of Sri Gobind Kalai,
resident of Uttar Taidu, Ompi, P.O. Taidubari,-799101, P.S. Taidu
District- Gomati, Tripura.
….. Petitioner
Versus

1. The State of Tripura , to be represented by its Secretary,
General Administration Department, Government of Tripura,
Secretariat Complex, New Capital Complex, P.O.-Kunjaban-
799010, P.S.-New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura;

2. The District Magistrate and Collector , Gomati Tripura
District, Udaipur, Gomati Tripura, Tripura, Pin-799120;

3. The Additional District Magistrate and Collector ,
Gomati Tripura District, Udaipur, Gomati Tripura, Tripura, Pin-
799120;

4. The Land Acquisition Officer , office of the District
Magistrate and Collector, Gomati District, Udaipur, Tripura, Pin-
799120;

5. The Dy. General Manager , (Project) NHIDCL for NH-208,
PMU, Udaipur, Koilarmath, Near DWS Office, Gomati Tripura,
Tripura, Pin-799120.
---Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. M. Majumder, Advocate


For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee GA
Date of hearing &
Delivery of judgment : 14.09.2026

Whether fit for reporting: Yes / No

BEFORE
HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment & Order (Oral)

14/09/2026

Heard Ms. M. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee, learned GA
appearing for the State-respondents.
2. By means of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has
prayed for the following reliefs:


Page 2 of 5

“i. Admit the instant Writ Petition;
ii. Issue notice upon the respondents;
iii. Issue a writ, order or direction calling upon the respondents to show cause as to
why appropriate direction shall not be issued upon the respondents to conduct
GPS/Geo-tracking Survey and physical verification of the petitioner's entire land
and ascertain the actual position and extent of the land acquired under Award No.
1248 dated 21.10.2025, measuring 0.498 acres, and, if upon such survey it is found
that any portion of the petitioner's remaining 0.242 acres of land is being used or
occupied for the purpose of the NH-208 Project beyond the acquired area, to direct
the respondents to initiate lawful acquisition proceedings and award necessary
compensation together with all statutory benefits, including solatium, additional
compensation and interest, in accordance with law, and further to demarcate the
acquired land and fix boundary pillars accordingly;
AND
iv. Issue a writ, order or direction upon the respondents to immediately stop all
ongoing construction and developmental work over the disputed portion and the
petitioner's remaining land until completion of the GPS/Geo-tracking Survey,
physical verification, demarcation and fixation of boundary piliars, failing which
the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be adequately
compensated in terms of money;
AND
v. To pass any other relief/reliefs, order/orders or direction/directions which Your
Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the instant
case.”

3. The facts of the case, the petitioner is the lawful allottee
and possessor of 0.740 acres of land under Khatian No. 720, out
of which 0.498 acres was acquired under Award No. 1248 dated
21.10.2025, leaving 0.242 acres with the petitioner. The
petitioner apprehends that a portion of the remaining 0.242
acres, which was never acquired, has been occupied/utilised for
the NH-208 Project without acquisition or compensation. It is
further case of the petitioner that no proper survey, physical
verification or demarcation has been conducted, nor boundary
pillars have been fixed. Despite the petitioner's demand notice,
the respondents have failed to take effective action. The
petitioner therefore seeks protection of her remaining land,
proper demarcation of the acquired area, and lawful
compensation if any portion beyond the acquired land is found to
have been occupied, along with interim stoppage of construction

Page 3 of 5

over the disputed portion until completion of the survey and
demarcation. Thus, the petitioner has filed the writ petition for
conducting GPS/Geo-Tracking Survey, physical verification and
demarcation of the petitioner's land and fixation of boundary
pillars in connection with the NH-208 Project.
4. The contention of Ms. Majumder, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner is that the respondent no.4 paid the award for
the portion of the land which has been acquired but at the same
time the respondent no. 4 has been using/utilizing the rest
portion of the land of the petitioner which has not been acquired.
It has further been contended that despite service of notice for
making accurate measurement of the land to ascertain how much
land has been acquired and how much land remained, the
respondent did not acted on the same till date. It was further
contended that the petitioner earlier approached this High Court
by filing writ petitions which were disposed of by specific
directions upon the respondent, but the respondents did not
acted upon the same.
5. Learned GA appearing for the State-respondents while
arguing has placed a document [Statement of Smt. Meri Kalai]
dated 20.08.2026 and copy of e-mail dated 21.08.2026 and
submitted that joint verification and demarcation was conducted
by the concerned department and upon satisfaction, the
petitioner has put his signature and through e-mail dated
21.08.2026 conveyed her regard to the respondents.
Confronting this submission, learned counsel for the
petitioner has raised serious objection to the submission of

Page 4 of 5

learned GA alongwith the documents, so submitted, stating inter
alia that the petitioner is an illiterate lady and is not acquainted
with English language and is not capable to write and understand
english and further questioned the signature alongwith the
veracity of the e-mail dated 21.08.2026 since the petitioner has
no access with internet.
6. This submission advanced by learned counsel for the
petitioner has raised serious apprehension to this court. In view
of the disputed question of the facts and with regard to the land
acquisition matter where compensation is paid, this court is
under reasonable apprehension that genuine land occupants shall
not be deprived of their legitimate right upon their land and, in
the event if there is any involvement or role of any middleman,
such needs to be looked into and eradicated.
7. This court is to be governed by the principle of justice,
equity and good conscious and hence is of the view that the core
issue requires a deep investigation rather than a constitutional
remedy. Needless to say, High Courts generally do not conduct
extensive evidence or forensic analysis rather delegate to
specialized law enforcement agencies like the Crime Branch .
Accordingly, this court exercising its inherent powers deems it fit
to refer the matter to the Crime Branch to meet the fair ends of
.
justice
8. In view of the above, this court directs the concerned
department to assign the matter to a Senior Officer of Crime
Branch to investigate into the matter. The Crime Branch shall
send the disputed documents for signature verification and cyber

Page 5 of 5

forensics. After completion of investigation the concerned Officer
of Crime Branch shall submit a report before the concerned DM &
Collector who shall thereafter initiate further action once the
report is received and also decide the grievance of the petitioner,
in accordance with law.
9. The instant writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid
manner.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed.

JUDGE






SAIKAT
KAR
Digitally signed by
SAIKAT KAR
Date: 2026.09.17
16:46:24 +05'30'