Disposed

Nom Tamut v. the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Jun 2022WP(C)/200/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an eviction order dated 04.05.2022 regarding alleged illegal construction on government land. The Court directed the appellate authority to decide the pending appeal within one month and stayed the eviction order till that decision to protect the petitioner's interests, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Eviction order dated 04.05.2022 suspended; appellate authority directed to decide pending appeal within one month.

Nom Tamut Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040006452022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 200/2022

¶5

1:Nom Tamut S/o Tajom Tamut, R/o Boleng, PO/PS Boleng, District Siang, Arunachal Pradesh, Contact No. 9362920678 (m)

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1:THE STATE OF AP and 3 Ors.

¶8

Represented by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.

¶9

2:The Secretary Department of Land Management Govt. of Land Management Govt. of AP Itanagar.

¶10

3:The Deputy Commissioner Siang District Boleng Govt. of AP

¶11

4:The Estate Officer cum Add. Deputy Commissioner Siang District Boleng Govt. of AP Itanagar

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : Ojing Pada

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 03-06-2022

¶18

Heard Mr. O. Pada, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

The petitioner is aggrieved by an eviction order dated 04.05.2022 issued by the Estate Officer-cum Additional Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Bioleng, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, whereby the petitioner was directed to remove the alleged illegal construction erected by the petitioner allegedly in Government land in between retaining wall of E.E. (UD &H) Office Complex and road which is completely fall under ROW of Boleng Township road.

¶20

Prior to such order, the petitioner was issued notice and he has also filed reply. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the order dated 04.05.2022, he had preferred an appeal dated 20.05.2022, before the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Boleng, i.e. the appellate authority under Section 12 of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 2003.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he should be protected from such demolition till the disposal of the appeal and the appeal is being not taken up presently.

¶22

This Court is of the considered opinion that, since an appeal is already pending before the appellate authority, interest of justice would be met, if the petitioner is protected from eviction till the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority as stated hereinabove.

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

Accordingly, it is directed that the appellate authority under the aforesaid Act shall take on record the appeal stated to have been filed by the petitioner on 20.05.2022 and decide the same within a period of one month from today. Till such decision by the appellate authority, the impugned eviction order dated 04.05.2022 issued by the Estate Officer-cum Additional Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Government of Arunachal Pradesh shall remain suspended.

¶25

While parting with the record, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion of the merit and/ or claim of the petitioner. The appellate authority is to exercise its power applying its own mind and as per law without being influenced by any observation made in this present order or for the reason of grant of stay of the impugned eviction order by this Court. The stay is granted only to protect the petitioner during the period of appeal.

¶26

With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is closed.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Nom Tamut v. the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nom Tamut v. the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Projjwal Dev and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 10 Ors.

Ariya Meto and 30 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Somcha Lowang Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Nabam Yari and Anr. Vs the State of Ap

Kuldeep Deka Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Nripen Baruah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.