SRI BIPUL PAUL Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts and points of law involved in both the writ petitions are identical and hence with the consent of learned counsel of the parties this common order is passed in respect of both the writ petitions.

(2.) Heard learned counsel, Mr. Somik Deb for the petitioners, learned counsel, Mr. J. Majumder for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5 and learned counsel, Mr. K.K. Pal for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

(3.) At the very outset Mr. Deb, learned counsel of the petitioners has submitted that in an earlier writ petition[WP(C) No.897 of 2016)] of almost similar nature this Court was pleased to direct the writ petitioner of that case to approach the Tribunal by filing an appeal against the impugned order passed by Municipal Commissioner and it is the humble contention of learned counsel, Mr. Deb that the present writ petitions shall not be dealt with similarly since the impugned orders passed by the Municipal Commissioner are beyond jurisdiction and therefore the orders are amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court.