Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040004012022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/140/2022 Obuk Mize S/o Shri Tamin Mize, Presently working as District Fishery Development Officer, Pasighat, Permanent Resident of J.N.C Campus, Balek Road, PO/PS Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. Ph. 8119014056 VERSUS THE STATE OF AP and 4 Ors. Represented by the Secretary, General Administration, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Papum Pare District, Itanagar. 2:The Secretary Age: 0 Occupation : Law and Judicial Itanagar Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh Papum Pare District Itanagar. 3:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Itanagar Capital Complex Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Extra Assistant Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Itanagar Capital Complex Naharlagun Papumpare District Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 2/4 5:Taking Talom Age: 0 Occupation : Husband of Smti. Otuk Tamut Talom Resident of D Sector PO/PS Naharlagun Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Dicky Panging, Sr. Adv, T Tayeng,Vijay Jamoh,D Tamuk,Marge D,Doge Lona,Kirmar Ado Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Pritam Taffo, Sr. Adv,Eho Menjo,Minter Karbak BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 01.06.2026 Heard Shri D. Panging, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri C. Tajo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Pangu, learned State Counsel, A.P. as well as Shri P. Taffo, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri E. Menjo, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5. 2. The instant case emanates from various orders pertaining to a money dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no. 5. 3. The facts projected in brief is that the respondent no. 5 has raised a dispute claiming money from the petitioner before the Extra-Assistant Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex, Naharlagun and pursuant to the same, certain orders were passed whereby a few Gaonburhas of different villages were selected for deciding the dispute. The Mel was accordingly held on 02.11.2018 to settle the dispute. There was an ex parte order dated 02.11.2018 whereby the petitioner was directed to pay Page No.# 3/4 Rs.20,20,000/-. Thereafter execution proceedings were held. 4. Shri Panging, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the initial orders of selecting certain Gaonburhas at the whims of the Extra-Assistant Commissioner is without the authority of law. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since there is no dispute with the fact of taking the loan which was for an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-, his client would be contended if a reasonable amount is directed to be paid by his client. He has submitted that as a matter of fact, sufficient time has elapsed since the dispute had arisen in the year 2018. He has submitted that his client is also agreeable to pay interest at the existing bank rate of interest. 5. Shri Taffo, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no. 5 has submitted that on principle, he would not oppose the proposal for an amicable settlement. It is, however submitted that the cause of action had arisen in the year 2015 and not in the year 2018. He has also submitted that considering that sufficient time has elapsed and also the cost of litigation, an amount of Rs. 15,00,000/-, at least should be directed to be paid. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances and also the proposal which has been broadly accepted in principle at the Bar, this Court has recorded the broad agreement in principle regarding an amicable settlement. This Court is also of the view that when the current trend is to get all disputes redressed by mediation, the said proposal is an welcome move. 7. Considering the above, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if a reasonable amount is directed to be paid which would be inclusive of the interest. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- Page No.# 4/4 (Rupees Eleven lakhs) would serve the ends of justice. 8. Let the aforesaid amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- which would be inclusive of interest to be paid to the respondent no. 5 within a period of 45 days from the date of this order. 9. The writ petition accordingly disposed of in the manner indicated above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant