(1.) Because of the fact that all these three writ petitions, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have raised identical questions of law and are based on substan-tially similar facts, all these writ petitions, on the request made by the learned counsel for the parties concerned, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
(2.) Before I formulate the questions, which have been raised for determination in these three writ petitions, it would be apposite that the material facts, giving rise to these writ petitions, filed by three female litigants, are taken note of. With this end in view, let me set out the material facts of each of these three writ petitions, which are not in controversy.
(3.) I have heard Ms. R. Guha, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners, and Mr. P. K. Biswas, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the Union of India, and Mr. B. Das, learned Senior counsel, appearing for the State of Tripura. I have also heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel, appearing for the private respondent in WP(C) 09/2012.