IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO, J.
Shri. Lhousakhotuo Vimero, S/o Lhounei-o – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Nagaland, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Nagaland and Others – Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 30(K) of 2016
Decided On : 24-04-2017
Unauthorized Occupation of Public Land Act, 1971 - Section 12 - Praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ of the like nature and/or direction or order quashing and setting aside the impugned Eviction - Order restraining the petitioner from under taking any construction inside the land bounded in the east by private land, on the west by approach road, on the north by private land and on the south by private land situated at “Megatse” which is also known as State Transport - Petitioner was also directed to submit documents in support of his claim, after considering the same came to the conclusion that the petitioner has no locus standi in respect of the land – Held, Court is of the considered opinion that to decide the issues in the case both questions of fact and law are involved, therefore, writ court is not the right forum for adjudication of the same - It is clear from the copy of the judgment, on which the petitioner based his claim of title and ownership over the land in issue that it was passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kohima who has no civil jurisdiction - But at the same time one cannot just brush aside the claim of the petitioner that the suit was filed before a proper civil court having jurisdiction over the matter though the judgment and decree were passed under the name of Chief Judicial Magistrate - Among them - All these and more facts which are relevant for deciding the dispute over the land in issue in this writ petition, will have to be proven with evidence for which the civil court is the right forum - That the petitioner may approach the civil court having jurisdiction for the remedies sought for in this writ petition and to do so he is given days from today - Till then, the respondents are directed not to disturb his possession – Ordered Accordingly.
1. This is a application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ of the like nature and/or direction or order quashing and setting aside the impugned Eviction Order No. REV/NST/8/90-91, dated 12.06.2014, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima and also quashing and setting aside the impugned order No. CNJ/CAA/2010, dated 03.02.2016, passed by the Commissioner, Government of Nagaland an appeal against the first impugned order.
2. Heard Mr. Evil Zao, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K. Sema, Sr. Addl. A.G., assisted by Ms. Livika, learned Government Advocate, on behalf of the State respondents.
3. The genesis of the case is that on 13.05.2014, office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, issued an order restraining the petitioner from under taking any construction inside the land bounded in the east by private land, on the west by approach road, on the north by private land and on the south by private land situated at “Megatse” which is also known as Nagaland State Transport Colony, Kohima. At the same time, the petitioner was also directed to submit documents in support of his claim. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his reply on 13.05.2014. On 15.05.2014, the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, after considering the same came to the conclusion that the petitioner has no locus standi in respect of the land, therefore, directed him to vacate the same within a period of 14 days from the date of the order. This is the first impugned order.
4. Being aggrieved the petitioner filed an appeal under section 12 of the Nagaland Eviction of Person in Unauthorized Occupation of Public Land Act, 1971 before the Commissioner to the Government of Nagaland. After hearing the parties the Commissioner passed the second impugned order dated 03.02.2016, rejecting the appeal but upholding the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Thereafter, the petitioner came to this Court praying for quashing and setting aside the above stated impugned orders on the following grounds;
That one Lt. Mr. Vilalie Seletsu inherited a land at “Megatse” which is now known as Nagaland State Transport Colony, Kohima, bounded on the north by a streamlet, on the south by the land of Lt. Duoselhou and Lt. Khumeza, on the west by the land of Mr. Thewhesielie and on the east by the National Highway. And his ownership on the same was confirmed by the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 14.07.2008 passed in Civil Suit No. 2/2007 by a Civil Court at Kohima. Out of this land owned by Lt. Mr. Vilalie the petitioner bought a piece of land, measuring 6400 Sq. ft. bounded as already mentioned above at the consideration amount of Rs. 1,10,000/-, on 21.02.2008 through a sale deed duly executed on the same day, and since then he has been in peaceful possession of the same.
That in the year 2009, one Mr. Ketsurhielie Kire filed a Civil Suit No. 1/2009 claiming ownership over the land of Lt. Mr. VIlalie Seletsu and at the same time praying for quashing and setting aside the ex-parte order dated 14.07.2008, passed by the same Civil Court in Civil Suit No. 2/2007. In that civil suit the Civil Court, by order dated 23.03.2010, set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.07.2008, passed in the Civil Suit No. 2/2007. Aggrieved by the said order Lt. Mr. Vilalie filed a Civil Appeal No. 2/2010 before the learned District Judge, Kohima. The learned District Judge after hearing the parties passed the order dated 03.05.2012, whereby the impugned order dated 23.03.2010, passed by the Civil Judge in Civil Judge in Civil Suit No. 1/2007 was set aside and the same was remanded to the Civil Court for retrial from the stage of framing of issues. During the pendency of the suit both Mr. Vilalie Selestu and Mr. Ketsurhielie Kire expired but none appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, therefore, the suit was dismissed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that sinc
Behram Khurshid Pesikaka v. State of Bombay
Balvant N. Viswamitra & Others v. Yadav Sadashiv Mule (Dead) Through Lrs. & Others
Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka (deceased) Through Lrs. v. Jasjit Singh & Others
Dhurandhar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash University & Ors.
Government of Orissa v. Ashok Transport Agency & Ors.
Pankaj Mehra & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
State of Kerala v. M.K. Kunhikannan Nambiar Manjeri Manikoth, Naduvil (dead) & Ors.
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.