Civil Courts retain jurisdiction to adjudicate land title disputes, preventing unilateral governmental cancellation of land titles without due process.

1. By this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the cancellation order dated 07-06-2016 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, Nagaland by which the Patta No. 5434, Plot No. 3924 at Ketientsa (New Secretariat Complex) issued to Shri Zhaleo Rio by order dated 21-07-2005 and the subsequent transfer of the patta to the present petitioner bearing Patta No. 6871, Plot No. 3924 by order dated 09-01-2011 has been cancelled.

2. Heard Mr. Limawapang, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Vilika Chishi, learned Government Advocate appearing for all the respondents.

3. Mr. Limawapang, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Shri Zhaleo Rio was allotted a plot of land measuring 100 x 60 at Ketientsa (New Secretariat Complex)covered by Patta No. 5434 with Plot No. 3924 on 21-07-2005. The present petitioner was a close friend of the said Shri Zhaleo Rio for a very long time and due to love and affection, the said Shri Zhaleo Rio decided to transfer the said land in favour of the petitioner by way of a Gift Deed which was executed on 04-01-2011. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for mutation of the said land into his name which was permitted by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima / respondent No. 3 after following all due procedures. Thereafter, after mutation, a new Patta No. 6871 over the same plot of land bearing No. 3924 was mutated in favour of the petitioner by land Patta dated 21-07-2005. The Revenue Officer, Kohima, Nagaland also issued Non - Encumbrances and Mortgageable Certificate dated 21-01-2011 in favour of the petitioner over the said plot of land that was mutated. While the petitioner was in peaceful occupation of the said land, the said Shri Zhaleo Rio received a notice under S.5 (1) of the Nagaland Eviction of Persons in Unauthorized Occupation of Public Land Act, 1971 directing him to show cause within 15 days as to why an order under S.6 (1) should not be issued. The said Shri Zhaleo Rio replied on 11-03-2013 indicating that he had bought the land from one Shri Selhou of Kohima Village and that the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima had also issued patta over the said land. Thereafter, no further steps were taken by the respondents and on 24-05-2016 another notice was issued by the Revenue Officer, Kohima to the petitioner and the said Shri Zhaleo Rio to reply as to why the pattas issued should not be cancelled indicating that the said plot of land is found to be in Government acquired land within the Chief Minister's Residential Complex and that the patta was issued without obtaining Government approval. Thereafter, without affording any opportunity of being heard nor following the due process, the respondent No. 3 issued the cancellation order dated 07-06-2016 by which the earlier Patta No. 5434 as well as the new Patta No. 6871 covering the same Plot No. 3924 was cancelled. The petitioner also made a reply against the said notice dated 24-05-2016 before the Revenue Officer, Kohima which was received on 08-06-2016. It is submitted that the petitioner was issued patta by the appropriate authority after following all due process of law and therefore, he has acquired right, title and interest over the said land on the basis of the patta issued by the competent authority. Further submissions has been forwarded that in the event, the petitioner's land is found to be under Government acquired land, still then, the respondents cannot cancel the patta of the petitioner in the manner that has been done inasmuch as,