[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
Sri Surajit Debnath vs The Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Ltd on 13 February, 2026
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) NO.84 OF 2026
Sri Surajit Debnath, aged 38 years, S/O. Sri Dipak Debnath, Residing at
Dhaleswar Road No.17, P.O. Dhaleswar, PIN-799007, P.S. East
Agartala, District West Tripura.
......Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Jiban Bharati Building,
New Delhi-110001 And also the ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation Ltd.), Pandit Dendayal Upadhyay Urja Bhawan, 5 Nelson
Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070, Represented by the
Chairman-cum-Managing Director.
2. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation Ltd., 7th Floor, Jiban Bharati Building, New Delhi-110001,
And also the ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.), Pandit
Dendayal Upadhyay Urja Bhawan, 5 Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi-110070.
3. The Asset Manager, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Tripura
Asset, Agartala, Badharghat, P.O. Arundhutinagar, P.S. Amtali, Agartala,
District West Tripura, PIN-799014.
4. The Competent Authority (ROU), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
Ltd., Quarter No.B-78, South Colony, P.O. Badharghat, Agartala, District
West Tripura, PIN-799014.
5. The Chief Engineer, LAQ Section, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
Ltd., Tripura Asset, Agartala, West Tripura.
6. The Land Acquisition Collector, (District Magistrate & Collector),
West Tripura, Agartala.
.....Respondent(s)
Present:-
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Dhar, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. P. Saha, Advocate.
Ms. A. Chakraborty, Advocate.
Mr. Rahul Debnath, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P.Gautam, Sr. G.A.
Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee, G.A.
Mr. S. Saha, Advocate.
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
Order
13.02.2026
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties.
2. The brief fact of this case is that the petitioner is the
recorded owner of land at Mouja Singarbil, West Tripura, which was
temporarily taken over by the respondent- Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
for drilling purposes. Though possession was taken and compensation was
assessed for land and trees, the petitioner contends that the amount awarded
is far below the prevailing market value and that proper valuation was not
undertaken.
2. Despite repeated representations, applications to authorities,
submission of valuation reports and comparable sale deeds, and issuance of
legal notices, no fair compensation has been granted. The petitioner alleges
that the land was taken and utilized without any formal agreement, causing
damage and loss of use.
3. Aggrieved by the failure of the authorities to determine and
pay just compensation, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before
this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus asking the
Respondents No.1 to 5 and each of them to give adequate compensation
for temporary acquisition of land of the Petitioner in schedule below and
trees thereon and pay adequate compensation for the same immediately
or within such period as may be prescribed by the Hon'ble Court;
(ii) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or order in the
like nature directing the Respondents No.1 to 5 and each of them to
compensate the Petitioner for temporary acquisition of his land in
schedule below within such period as may be prescribed by the Hon'ble
Court:
(iii) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or order in
the like nature directing the Respondents No.1 to 5 and each of them to
take step under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement
Act, 2013 and referred the matter to the appropriate authority for
determination of rate of compensation and award in terms of law;
(iv) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or order in
the like nature compelling the Respondents No.1 to 5 and each of them to
take step as per Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement
Act, 2013 within such period as may be prescribed by the Hon'ble Court:
(v) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari and/or in the
like nature allowing adequate compensation in favour of the Petitioner
for temporary acquisition of land and trees thereon by the Respondent
No.5 and calling upon all documents from the Respondents as may be
necessary;
(vi) Issue necessary order/direction as may be necessary
and deem fit and proper for the ends of justice;
(vii) granting cost and incidental thereto;
(viii) and be pleased to pass any other order/direction as
this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper;
And the Petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.
4. It is seen from the record that petitioner has submitted
representation dated 12.12.2024 before the respondent No.5 ventilating its
grievance but the same is pending till date without any result. Thereafter,
the petitioner also issued an Advocate notice in this regard to the
respondents, but the same also yield no result.
5. As such, in view of the above mentioned circumstances,
without going into the merits, this present writ petition is disposed of with a
direction upon the respondents to consider the representation dated
12.12.2024 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, within a
period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
The same shall be communicated to the petitioner upon such consideration.
6. With the above observation and direction, this present writ
petition stands disposed of. As a sequel stay if any stands vacated. Pending
application, if any also stands closed.
DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
Suhanjit
RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by
RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT
SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2026.02.18 10:38:48
SINGHA +05'30'
