JUDGMENT :

1. In this Civil Revision Petition, under section 50 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation 1945, (AFR1945), the petitioner-Shri Tumsen Basar has put to challenge the order, Memo No. NRL-01/2019-2020, dated on 22.03.2021, passed by the learned Addl. Commissioner, Nari, Lower Siang District, in Execution Case No. NRJ-01/2020.

2. It is to be noted here that vide the impugned order, dated 22.03.2021, the learned Addl. Commissioner, Nari had directed the EAC, Nari to conduct an enquiry by taking opinion of the villagers in regard to the decision of 15.06.19, to create new cause of action to tilt the proceeding in favour of the private respondent.

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

“Smti. Yaya Bomjen, daughter of Shri Gibom Bomjen, Nari village lodged one complaint before the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Nari, Lower Sinag District that an approach road, leading to her residence, has been blocked by Smti. Jumbom Koyu, wife of Late D. Koyu of Nari Village. On the other hand Smti. Jumbom Koyu claimed that the said approach road has been blocked by the complainant herself at the other end, and thereby, not allowing any traffic/passerby to pass through it. Then the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Nari, vide letter dated 06.06.2029, has directed Shri Tumken Dora and Shri Gomi Rina, both are Gaonburah of Nari village to conduct Keba, within 15 days of issuing of the said order. Accordingly, one Keba was held on 15.06.2019, and the Keba has resolved unanimously that from that day onward the road/route shall be opened by Smti. Jumbam Koyu. The Keba also decided that the parties shall not complain again regarding the same. An order of leaving the old Road has also been passed. After that, Smti. Jumbom Koyu preferred an appeal against the said Keba decision dated 15.06.2019, in the court of Deputy Commissioner, Lower Siang District, Likabali. The Deputy Commissioner then referred the matter to the Addl. D.C. Nari to decide the same. But, the learned Addl. D.C., Nari has disposed of the matter by directing the parties to approach appropriate/competent court, as in view of judgment of this court in WP(C) 99(AP) 2018, dated 13.03.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed one representation before the village authority for execution of the Keba decision. But, the village authority had refused to decide the same and referred the matter to the Addl. Deputy Commissioner. But, the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner also refused to decide the same. Then on 03.03.2021, the respondent had started permanent construction. Then one FIR had been lodged with the concerned Police Station, but, the same was referred to Addl. D.C., Nari. Then the In-Charge Addl. D.C. Nari had visited the spot with police and issued order on 05.03.2021, to the respondent, to remove all obstruction within 10 days. The said timeline has elapsed on 15.03.2021. Then on that day the respondent had filed reply against the decision on 05.03.2021. Then the Addl. D.C. had accepted the reply and passed the impugned order, dated 22.03.2021, and directed the EAC, Nari to enquire about the matter by taking opinion of the villagers in regards to decision dated 15.06.2019.”

4. Being highly aggrieved by the impugned order, dated 22.03.2021, the petitioner has preferred this Civil Revision Petition under section 50 of the AFR-1945, on the following grounds:-

(i) That, if the impugned order, dated 22.03.2021, is allowed to operate then it will not only amounts to creation of new cause of action pertaining to the dispute, but also amounts to superseding the due procedure prescribed under AFR-1945, and as the dispute has already been settled on 15.06.2019, the same cannot be open and inquired into;

(ii) That, while the learned Addl. D.C., Nari had refused to take up the appeal of the respondent No.1 and the execution petition filed by the petitioner on the pretext of having no jurisdiction he cannot act u