DONA PARTIN Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that calls for adjudication in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is identical with the question involved in Civil Rule No. 3494/93. Hence, it is proposed to dispose of both the writ petitions by a single order.

(2.) The petitioner Shri Dona Partin in Civil Rule No. 3492/93 and Smt. Maloti Tamuli, the writ petitioner in Civil Rule No. 3494/93 moved this Court invoking the writ jurisdiction to quash the order dated 30.11.93 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, East Siang District, Pasighat under Memo No. ESR/LR-36/90 directing the writ petitioners to vacate the land under their occupation.

(3.) The contention of Shri Dona Partin in Civil Rule No. 3492/93 is that he has been in occupation of a plot of land measuring about 150 yards x 150 yards at Pasighat since 1962. The land was reclaimed after heavy expenditure whereon he had constructed a building for residence covering more than 50 x 50 Sq. Ft. According to him, the said plot was never reserved by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh either for public or for Government purpose. As there is no statute to regulate the Govt. land in Arunachal Pradesh, the petitioner applied before the Deputy Commissioner for regularisation of the land under his possession in pursuance of a non-statutory land allotment system introduced by the State Government in 1963. But the Deputy Commissioner regularised his possession on a part of land with an assurance to regularise possession of the remaining part in due course. But eventually, he was directed by the Deputy Commissioner to withdraw from the excess land.