Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010147822025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/222/2025 SRI MILLO RUJA S/O LATE MILLO HANYANG, R/O CHIMPU, ITANAGAR, P.S. CHIMPU, DIST. PAPUM PARE, ARUNACHAL PRADESH. 2: MITOR KINO S/O LATE SONGNI KINO R/O CHIMPU ITANAGAR P.S. CHIMPU DIST. PAPUM PARE ARUNACHAL PRADESH. 3: KAYIN ERING S/O LATE A. ERING R/O NITI BIHAR ITANAGAR P.S. NITI BIHAR DIST. PAPUM PARE ARUNACHAL PRADESH. 4: TADAR NACHUNG S/O LATE TAKO HINDA R/O CHIMPU ITANAGAR P.S. CHIMPU DIST. PAPUM PARE ARUNACHAL PRDESH. 5: BEDUM BORANG S/O LATE OKI BORANG Page No.# 2/4 R/O NITI BIHAR ITANAGAR P.S. NITI BIHAR DIST. PAPUM PARE ARUNACHAL PRADESH VERSUS THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECY., GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH, ITANAGAR. 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPTT. OF HOME GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH ITANAGAR. 3:THE COMMISSIONER DEPTT. OF HOME GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH ITANAGAR. 4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH ITANAGAR. 5:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ARUNACHAL PRADESH ITANAGAR. 6:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (E) PHQ ITANAGAR. 7:THE ASSTT. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ESTABLISHMENT) POLICE HEAD QUARTERS ITANAGAR. 8:THE SECY. FINANCE GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA, MR. J K ROY Page No.# 3/4 Advocate for the Respondent : GA, AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 30.06.2025 (S.P. Khaund, J) Heard learned counsel Mr. R. Sarma for the appellants No. 1. Sri Millo Ruja, 2. Sri Mitor Kino, 3. Sri Kayin Ering, 4. Sri Tadar Nachung and 5. Sri Bedum Borang, who have filed this appeal against the order dated 25.06.2025 passed by the Single Judge in I.A.(C)/161/2025 connected with WP(C) No. 172/2025 as their prayer for stay of holding DPC was not considered by the learned Single Judge. 2. Heard Mr. A. Chandran, learned Senior Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh. 3. It is submitted by the learned Senior Government Advocate that the petitioner could have easily approached the Single Bench with the grievance instead of filing this writ appeal. 4. The appellants as applicants in the interlocutory application had prayed for stay of the WT Message dated 05.06.2025 issued by the IGP (ADMN), Itanagar, thereby stopping the process of holding DPC, as an interim measure, till disposal of the connected WP(C) No. 172/2025. Page No.# 4/4 5. In the interlocutory application, the learned Single Judge vide order dated 25.06.2025 directed the applicants/petitioners to implead the affected parties as private respondents, but the appellants are before this Court owing to shortage of time as the matter was proposed to be listed after a week, which happens to be just before the vacation. This delay may render the entire writ petition infrucutous if the process of holding the DPC is not stayed. 6. We have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. 7. It appears that the appellants may be allowed to implead the affected parties as private respondents in the interlocutory application on or before 03.07.2025 in the interlocutory application. 8. Till then, the process of holding DPC is kept in abeyance. 9. In terms of the above observation, this appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant