Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Kardak Ete, J.
Tagam Mibang S/o Late Tatok Mibang - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of AP and Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) No. 372 of 2023
Decided On : 12-04-2024
NOC - Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service - Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 2003 - [Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 2003, Article 154, Article 166] - The court discussed the issuance of No Objection Certificate (NOC) for promotion to Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service (Selection Grade) and the petitioner's issuance of provisional land allotment orders over government land, finding the petitioner's actions contrary to norms and procedures, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a direction to issue NOC for promotion to Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service (Selection Grade) and to include his name in the DPC. The petitioner had issued provisional land allotment orders over government land, leading to objections and refusal of NOC by the authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's issuance of provisional land allotment orders over government land was contrary to norms and procedures, and the petitioner's refusal to take corrective measures led to the dismissal of the writ petition.
Issues: The issues involved the refusal of NOC for promotion, the petitioner's issuance of provisional land allotment orders, and the petitioner's reluctance to take corrective measures.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's actions were contrary to norms and procedures, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition and emphasized that the petitioner's consideration for promotion must be in accordance with applicable rules and procedures.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the respondent authorities were advised to consider the petitioner's case if corrective measures were taken.
Heard Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioner. And also heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State respondents.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Boleng to issue No Objection Certificate (hereinafter referred to as NOC in short) so as to enable the petitioner to submit the same to the Department of Personnel, Government of Arunachal Pradesh for consideration for promotion to Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service (Selection Grade), for a direction to include the name of the petitioner as and when the DPC is held with or without NOC being issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District and for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and act upon the various representations submitted by the petitioner.
3. The case projected by the petitioner, in brief, is that, he being serving Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service (Senior Grade) Officer, pursuant to the letter, dated 08.06.2023, being Memo No. PERS-12/9/2021, issued by the Under Secretary (Personnel), Government of Arunachal Pradesh requesting 28 (twenty-eight) serving Arunachal Pradesh Civil Service (APCS) (Senior Grade) including the petitioner to submit NOC and APAR/IPR, if any, for the last five years so as to enable the Department of Personnel to fill the anticipated resultant vacancies in APCS (Selection Grade), the petitioner has submitted a letter dated 12.06.2023 to the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, for issuance of NOC. The Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, endorsed the same to the concerned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, for verification before issuance of NOC.
4. The Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, by an order No. RMG/LAND/2023-24, dated 13.06.2023, directed the Circle Officer, Jomlo-Mobuk, to submit report for onward submission to the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District. The Circle Officer, Jumlo-Mobuk, submitted a verification report dated 16.06.2023. In the verification report, the EAC, Rumgong in-charge Circle Officer, Jomlo-Mobuk, reported that three numbers of provisional land allotment orders for three different plots which fall within the government land have been issued by the petitioner in the name of his mother, wife and himself. It is found that all the plots are fenced with barbed wire and wood posts on the day of the submission of the report.
5. The Addl. Deputy Commissioner-cum-Estate Officer, Rumgong, Siang District intimated the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, indicating that the plots of land occupied by the relatives of the petitioner and himself have been re-encroached by erecting re-fenced with barbed wire under the influence of the petitioner with an intention to occupy the land permanently. The Addl. Deputy Commissioner has also suggested to review the report before the issuance of the NOC to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner must remove/ demolish all the re-constructed structures from the evicted plot of land and the original provisional land allotment orders issued by him be surrendered and the petitioner must produce a clearance certificate of non-encroachment of government land by him and his family members, duly counter signed by the Circle Officer, Jomlo-Mobuk, and the case filed against the Deputy Commissioner and Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, be withdrawn under any circumstances.
6. On the receipt of above report from the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, has communicated a letter dated 27.06.2023, to the petitioner to take necessary corrective measures wherever applicable. In response, the petitioner submitted a reply to the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, denying all the allegations which was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District vide letter dated 29.06.2023. It is contended by the petitioner that since then the Deputy Commissioner is not issuing NOC to the petitioner even after submission of reminder letter
Executive instructions can supplement statutory rules if they are silent on an issue, and the impugned orders were found to be in the interest of public and administrative exigencies.
An employee cannot face departmental proceedings based on issues already settled by prior judgments, especially when the employer's actions are deemed biased and illegal.
The rejection of NOC after selection was deemed illegal and biased, and the petitioner cannot be proceeded for alleged misconduct based on the failure to seek permission before applying for deputatio....
The court affirmed that the issuance of a No Objection Certificate for quarry lease was valid as the petitioners had no title over the disputed land, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines.
The main legal point established is that a landowner may be required to obtain NOC for land development activities in accordance with the notification empowering the Chief Estate Officer, and the res....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and providing a reasonable opportunity for the parties to present their case.
Traditional land ownership rights in Arunachal Pradesh must be acknowledged, and mere possession is insufficient to establish ownership without considering customary practices.
A petitioner must come to court with clean hands and disclose all material facts; failure to do so can result in dismissal of the claim.
A prior court ruling on an employee's eligibility for transfer precludes subsequent disciplinary action based on the same grounds.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
