Mr. M. Biswas vs Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee
2026 Latest Caselaw 559 Tri

Tripura High Court

Mr. M. Biswas vs Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee on 13 February, 2026

Author: T. Amarnath Goud

Bench: T. Amarnath Goud

                                          Page 1 of 2




                                HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                      AGARTALA
                                   WP(C) NO.99 OF 2026
Present:-
        For the Petitioner(s)        : Mr. M. Biswas, Advocate.
                                       Mr. N. Alam, Advocate.
                                       Mr. D. P. Ghosh, Advocate.
                                       Mr. E.L. Darlong, Advocate.
                                       Mr. N. Das, Advocate.

        For the Respondent(s)        : Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharjee, G.A.

Mr. R. Datta, Advocate.

HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD Order 13.02.2026

1. When the case is called, both sides are present.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assailed the order passed by respondent No.3, the Secretary, Tripura Sports Council, in allotment of the Swami Vivekananda Maiden to the 4 th respondent, i.e., M/s Universal Advertisement, a private individual, and contends that even before the permission was granted to the respondent No.4 on 15.12.2025, the 3rd respondent had granted permission in respect of the Swami Vivekananda Maidan, to the petitioner vide permission dated 4th December, 2025. In this regard, the said action of the respondents is challenged.

3. Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, submits before this Court that the writ petition itself is not maintainable and the same needs to be dismissed, as the respondent No.3, against whom the relief is sought, is not a "State" within meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and prays that the same needs to be dismissed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent is an instrument of the State and the entire body is nominated by the State Government, and also that the

Chairman of the Council is the Minister of the State in charge of Youth Affairs, State of Tripura.

5. In view of the above, since the matter requires further examination on the point of maintainability, the present writ petition is taken on record and admitted. It is, however, kept open to the respondents to raise objection with regard to maintainability in their counter affidavit as a preliminary objection.

6. This Court has considered the interim prayer whereby the petitioner has sought a direction upon the respondent authorities to maintain status quo in respect of Swami Vivekananda Maidan and to stay the operation of the permission granted under File No. 185/TSC/Permission/2018(L)/3370 dated 15.12.2025. However, no separate interlocutory application seeking injunction or stay of the said permission has been filed before this Court. Further, the said permission document has not been placed on record, nor has the same been specifically challenged in accordance with law. In absence of a proper application and the document being brought on record for consideration, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same and entertain the said request.

7. However, the petitioner shall take steps for service of notice upon the un-served respondent No.4 as expeditiously as possible as per procedure.

8. The petitioner is also permitted to take out personal notice upon the 4th respondent by way of RPAD or „dasti‟ service and file proof of the same.

9. List this matter for hearing once the pleadings are filed and exchanged amongst the parties.

DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J Suhanjit

RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2026.02.13 SINGHA 16:58:00 +05'30'