STATE OF NAGALAND Vs. AVIO NALEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.N. Balgopal, learned Advocate General and Mr. T.B. Jamir, the learned Senior Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. Nitya Nambin and Mr. Vitsorio, the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State of Nagaland. We have also heard Mr. A. Zho, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants in WA No. 34(K)/2010 and WA No. 35(K)/2010 and Mr. Imkong Jamir, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondent.

(2.) All the 4 (four) appeals arises out of the common judgment and order dtd. 19/11/2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 31(K)/2006 and WP(C) No. 60(K)/2006. In order to appreciate and consider the appeals before us which challenges the legality of judgment and order dtd. 19/11/2010 (for short referred to as the impugned judgment and order), it would be relevant to take note of the facts of the case. For the sake of convenience, the Parties herein are referred in the same status as they stood in WP(C) No. 31(K)/2006.

(3.) The writ petitioners in WP(C) No. 31(K)/2006 claims that after the 1970 Re-settlement operation, a plot of land measuring 40 Bighas was allotted by the competent authority in favour of the Petitioner No. 1 under Dag No. 36 covered by Patta No. 19 on 12/8/1971. On the basis of the said allotment, as claimed by the Petitioners in WP(C) No. 31(K)/2006, the name of the Petitioner No. 1 was duly recorded in the revenue records i.e. in the Chitha Register and the Jamabandi maintained in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur. As the Petitioner No. 1, was suffering from serious illness, he by a Power of Attorney dtd. 17/5/1991 appointed the Petitioner No. 2 to represent him before any Court in connection with the land covered by Dag No. 36 of Patta No. 19. On that very day, the Petitioner No. 2, who was the Attorney of the Petitioner No. 1, lodged a written complaint before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, complaining that the Respondent No. 3 had started encroaching upon the land of the Petitioners. The said complaint was not responded by the Revenue Authorities for which another complaint was filed in the 1st week of September, 1991 and thereupon the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur vide an order bearing No. LD-14/91/D dtd. 9/9/1991 directed both the Petitioners and the Respondent No. 3 to occupy their own lands at 7th Mile according to the allotments under Dag Nos. 2 and 6 and Dag No. 36 respectively.