JUDGMENT :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

1. In this writ petition, under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Shri Lolang Bagang, has put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the order of Mel proceeding No. DC/ICC/JUD/MISC/2015, dated 28.09.2015, 16.10.2015 and 03.11.2015; the Mel Decision in Case No. DC/ICC/JUD/MISC/2015, dated 10.11.2015 and the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, dated 30.09.2016, vide No. DC/LM/LPC-18/08.

2. The factual background leading to filing of the present petition is briefly stated as under:

“The petitioner, herein, Shri Lolang Bagang, had possessed a plot of land situated at Model Village Naharlagun comprising of an area of 216 Sq. Meters, by virtue of Gift Deed executed in his favour by Smti Techi Menia, the respondent No. 4 herein, dated 17.02.2014, and the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, vide LPC No. DC/CC/LPC-18/08, dated 05.10.2015, has issued fresh LPC to him. Thereafter, Smti Techi Menia, who is the private respondent No. 4 here in this case, lodged a complaint before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, Naharlagun, requesting for Mel Order and thereafter the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, Naharlagun, respondent No. 3, has issued 3 (three) Mel Orders, dated 28.09.2015, 16.10.2015 and 03.11.2015, respectively, wherein, the list of Arbitrators for both the parties were readily prepared by the respondent No. 3. But, not a single copy of the aforesaid 3 (three) orders have been served to the petitioner though there is a provision under Section 38 (1) and (2) of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation Act, 1945, for arbitration and Mel proceeding and on agreed by the parties, each party shall nominate as equal number of the Panchayat, Political Officer and Assistant Political Officer either to choose or direct the Panchayat to choose a further person a umpire, which is violated by the respondent No. 3 and all the members present in the so called Mel including the respondent No. 3, is aware of that the private respondent No. 4, Smt. Techi Menia, has gifted the aforesaid plot of land by virtue of Gift Deed, dated 17.02.2014, and the same Mel proceeding was conducted at the will of the complainant including the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, Naharlagun, and there is no provision for single party hearing and the order dated 30.09.2016, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, in Case No. DC/LM/LPC-18/08(Pt), reflects that the Mel order has been passed by the respondent No. 3, on 10.11.2015, in favour of the respondent No. 4 without hearing the writ petitioner and the Mel Order, dated 10.11.2015, without giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the cancellation order was also passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Deputy Commissioner is the apex authority in terms of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation Act, 1945, and hearing can be made by the Deputy Commissioner when it comes in the forms of Appeal or else the Deputy Commissioner has no authority to decide the Mel order. The order dated 30.09.2016, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, in the Case No. DC/LM/LPC-18/08(Pt), reflects that the civil suit was proceeded in the Court of Deputy Commissioner for land dispute case in between Smt. Techi Menia vs. Lolang Bagang over a plot of land measuring 216 Sq. Mtrs. and the order dated 10.09.2016, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, is not valid in the eye of law and he has no jurisdiction and no authority to try the civil suit and it is the Civil Court to decide the matter after due proceeding and as such, the order dated 30.09.2016 is liable to be set aside. That, after separation judiciary from administrative authority in the State of Arunachal in the year 2013 and in view of Notification dated 06.01.2014, the judicial powers of the executive authorit