Page No.# 1/57 GAHC030001922025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/52/2025 Union of India and 2 Ors. R/b the Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - I 2: The Joint Secretary 3: The Joint Secretar VERSUS Sh Chuaukunga and 260 Ors. S/o Suakkhuma, Village - Tlangkhang ram 2:Dengthuama 3:Hrangchuailova 4:Hrangkima 5:Laluva 6:Lalchhawna 7:Lalhliana 8:Lallaithangi Page No.# 2/57 9:Lalnunzira 10:Lalrinmawia 11:Lalrinmawia 12:Lungmuana 13:Ngurhnema 14:Rualkhuma 15:Sainghinga 16:Sanghrima 17:Sanghuliana 18:Seibula 19:Thangdailova 20:Thangzika 21:Vanlalruata 22:Zabiaka 23:Zachhuana 24:Zahmingthanga Page No.# 3/57 25:Zathanga 26:Lalthangkhuma 27:Anil Bikash 28:Anil Gandhi 29:Animoy 30:Arem Shanti 31:Arun Bikash 32:Arun Shanti 33:Barat 34:Barata 35:Benachya 36:Bilash Kumar 37:Bimal Kanti 38:Bimal Kanti 39:Binoy 40:Binoy Page No.# 4/57 41:Bolobotdro 42:Bono Bijoy 43:Bono Bikash 44:Bono Kumar 45:Bosudive 46:Buddha lal 47:Buddha Ranjan 48:CG Kala 49:Chana 50:Chandro 51:Chondro Kumar 52:Chondro Lal 53:Chigonchan Chakma 54:Chitro Sen 55:Chondro Lota 56:Dandia Page No.# 5/57 57:Dhana Kumar 58:Dhino Kumar 59:Dirbadhan 60:Doyal Mohan 61:Ganya Henga 62:Gorui Chondro 63:Govt. Primary School 64:Gulmani (rongengli) 65:Gulok Dhan 66:Gyana Lal 67:Gayna Moy 68:Gyana Ranjan 69:Jamani Kumar 70:Jedoni 71:Joysudon Chakma 72:Jugesh Gandhi Page No.# 6/57 73:Jyoti Shankar 74:Jyotir Moy 75:Jyotir Moy 76:Kala Chan 77:Kala Chan 78:Kala Hula Chakma 79:Kala Ranjon 80:Kalachan 81:Kandhar Singh 82:Kiron 83:Kripa Lal 84:Krishno Kumar 85:Lal Mohan 86:Lalmohan 87:Langti 88:Lokhi Kumar Page No.# 7/57 89:Lokhi Mohan Chakma 90:Lokhidan Chakma 91:Lokhi Ranjon 92:Lohit Chondro 93:Lolit Chondro 94:Lonka Kumar 95:Lushai Kumar 96:Man Kumar 97:Mandita 98:Mangapa 99:Mangopa Chakma 100:Maratua 101:Milon 102:Monu Ranjan 103:Monu Ranjan 104:Monu Badro Page No.# 8/57 105:Motil 106:Motilal 107:Nakku 108:Natun Kumar 109:Nibaran 110:Nibaron Chakma 111:Niahr Bindu 112:Nikal Boron 113:Nilo Kumar 114:Nimal Kanti 115:Nirmal Kanti 116:Nishi Mohan 117:Nauram 118:Palan 119:Phul Kamal 120:Prana Ranjan Page No.# 9/57 121:Presby Church 122:Priochan 123:Priti Moy 124:Punya ban 125:Probat Kusum 126:Punya Sen 127:Rahul 128:Raisona 129:Raj Kusum 130:Ranjan Kumar Chakma 131:Ratnajit 132:Rinisha 133:Robi Kumar 134:Rovi Chan 135:Sanatia 136:Sani Mohan Page No.# 10/57 137:Shanto Moi 138:Sirojit 139:Sova Chand 140:Subas Chondro 141:Subal Kanti 142:Subol Chondro 143:Sukro Sen 144:Suresh Chondro 145:Suresh Kanti 146:Suresh Ranjon 147:Surjo Kumar 148:Suro Kumar 149:Surudha Kumar 150:Tlangliani 151:Thanngura 152:Uday Kumar Page No.# 11/57 153:Upendra Lal Chakma 154:Vanlaltlana 155:YCA Hall 156:Nando Moni 157:Anil Bosu 158:Anil Kumar 159:B.P.Hemonto 160:Barun Kumar 161:Baghya Dhan 162:Biakhluna 163:Biro Kumar 164:C.Birish Kumar 165:Dachia 166:Dino Chondro 167:Dononjoy 168:Guno Joy Page No.# 12/57 169:Gyana Ranjan 170:Gyana Baron 171:Hualmawii 172:Indro Rega 173:Indrodon 174:Jotinmoy 175:Kapmawia 176:Krishna Kumar 177:Laldingliana 178:Lalhlimpuii 179:Sangkawii 180:Lalnunsanga 181:Lalramhluna 182:Lalrimawia 183:Lalthlamuana 184:Lalzarmawia Page No.# 13/57 185:Lalhmunsiami 186:Nilam Ber 187:Notun Kumar 188:Notun Joy 189:Osina 190:Posso Saii 191:Podhosoba 192:Zothana 193:Pollin 194:Probat Kusum 195:Prodip 196:Punorani 197:R.L.Dawngliana 198:Radnadip 199:Rasdhon 200:Robi Chondro Page No.# 14/57 201:Robidon 202:Ranjoni Kumar 203:Sadona Devi 204:Santi Kumar 205:Santibijai 206:Sengu 207:Shadi 208:Sigonbi 209:Sulomoni 210:Sumitmawi 211:Surolota 212:Surresh Donon 213:Susanko 214:Sutin Chandro 215:Syamai Kanti 216:Thanhranga Page No.# 15/57 217:VFDC Plantation 218:Vikram 219:Zorina 220:Babeswar 221:Basanti 222:Bhupen 223:Bibennia Chakma 224:Bijoy Singh 225:Binayan 226:Binento 227:Binota 228:Buddha Mala 229:Chandra Bahu 230:Chigonchan 231:Gyna Ranjon 232:Gyana Ranjon Page No.# 16/57 233:H.Lalrintlunga 234:J.Nandu 235:Jyoti Ranjon 236:Jyotika 237:Kokilsona 238:Lalnghakliani 239:Mili 240:Mitra 241:Nanda Rani 242:Nihar Bala 243:Nilupal Chakma 244:Niroloda 245:Nishi Chondro 246:P.C.Zosangliana 247:Pingata 248:Proti Mohan Page No.# 17/57 249:Punyosen 250:Rajiv nagar Area 251:Rinisha 252:Rupan 253:Sapna Kumar 254:Sadhana Kumar 255:Songhita 256:Suresh Gandhi 257:Vivekananda 258:The State of Mizoram 259:The Deputy Commissioner and District Collector 260:The General Manager 261:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizora Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms Zairemsangpuii Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, Sr.Adv. for R1 to R 257 Page No.# 18/57 Linked Case : WA/5/2025 Union of India and 2 Ors. R/b the Secretry to the Govt. of India Ministry of Home Affairs North Block Central SWecretariat New Delhi-I 2: The Joint Secretary NE-II Govt. of India Ministry of Home Affairs Union of India North Block e 3: The Joint Secretary Departtment of Border Management-III MHA NDCC Building New Delhi VERSUS Sh Chuaukunga and 260 Ors. L.H. Lianhrima, Sr.Adv. for R1 to R 257 Page No.# 18/57 Linked Case : WA/5/2025 Union of India and 2 Ors. R/b the Secretry to the Govt. of India Ministry of Home Affairs North Block Central SWecretariat New Delhi-I 2: The Joint Secretary NE-II Govt. of India Ministry of Home Affairs Union of India North Block e 3: The Joint Secretary Departtment of Border Management-III MHA NDCC Building New Delhi VERSUS Sh Chuaukunga and 260 Ors. S/o Suakkhuma Village - Tlangkhang ram 2:Denghnuna S/o Biakthuama (L) Village - Pukzing 3:Hrangchuailova S/o Kaithanga (L) Village - Pukzing 4:Hrangkima S/o Chhunga Village - Tlangkhang ram 5:Laluva S/o Zama (L) Village - Pukzing 6:Lalchhawna S/o Kamlova (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 7:Lalhliana Page No.# 19/57 S/o K.Chana Village - Pukzing 8:Lallaithangi D/o Tlangtimawia Village - Sihphir ram 9:Lalnunzira S/o Hranga Village - Pukzing 10:Lalrinmawia S/o Chuaukunga Village - Pukzing 11:Lalrinmawia S/o Vanlalruata Village - Phunchang zawl 12:Lungmuana S/o Thanhranga (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 13:Ngurhnema S/o Hauhnuna Village - Pukzing 14:Rualkhua S/o Zakhawliana Village - Tlangkhang ram 15:Sainghinga S/o Vala (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 16:Sanghrima S/o Nothanga (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 17:Sanghuliana S/o Thanzinga Village - Pukzing 18:Seibula S/o Vantawna (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 19:Thangdailova S/o Sanghuliana Page No.# 20/57 Village - Tlangkhang ram 20:Thangzika S/o Vunga (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 21:Vanlalruata S/o Hranga Village - Tlangkhang ram 22:Zabiaka S/o Dengkhuma (L) Village - Tlangkhang ram 23:Zachhuana S/o Chhunthianga (L) Village - Pukzing 24:Zahmingthanga S/o Haukunga (L) Village - Pukzing 25:Zathanga S/o Lalchhawna (L) Village - Pukzing 26:Lalthangkhuma S/o Vanhlira Sailo (L) Village - Pukzing 27:Anil Bikash S/o Kurna Mohan Village Andermanik 28:Anil Gandhi S/o Bashi Mohan Village Andermanik 29:Animoy S/o Budha Joy Village Andermanik 30:Arem Shanti S/o Sarat Kumar Village Andermanik 31:Arun Bikash S/o Korana Mohan Page No.# 21/57 Village Andermanik 32:Arun Shanti S/o Bhudan Joy Village Andermanik 33:Barat S/o Rajak Dhan Village Andermanik 34:Barata S/o Rajak Dhan Village Andermanik 35:Benachya S/o Radamon Village Andermanik 36:Bilash Kumar S/o Demkana Village Andermanik 37:Bimal Kanti S/o Monu Ranjan Village Andermanik 38:Bimal Kanti S/o Niba Ronjon Village Andermanik 39:Binoy S/o Jyotir moy Village Andermanik 40:Binoy S/o Manu Chandra Village Andermanik 41:Bolobotdro S/o Kanangu Village Andermanik 42:Bono Bijoy S/o MongalDhan Village Andermanik 43:Bono Bikash S/o Rula Raj Page No.# 22/57 Village Andermanik 44:Bono Kumar S/o Chogo Village Andermanik 45:Bosudive S/o Puri Kumar Village Andermanik 46:Biddha S/o Kunjo Kishore Village Andermanik 47:Buddha Ranjan S/o Suresh Kumar Village Andermanik 48:CG Kala S/o Ahlalti Village Andermanik 49:Chana S/o Mongal Dhan Village Andermanik 50:Chandra S/o Jibanya Village Andermanik 51:Chandro Kumar S/o Dema Khana Village Andermanik 52:Chondro Lal S/o Jaman Chandra Village Andermanik 53:Chigonchan Chakma S/o Surjo Sen Chakma Village Andermanik 54:Chitro Sen S/o Dharma Choron Village Andermanik 55:Chondro Lota S/o Sudish Chandro Page No.# 23/57 Village Andermanik 56:Dandia S/o Roma Lal Village Andermanik 57:Dhana Kumar S/o Mangal Dhan Village Andermanik 58:Dhino Kumar S/o Monu Ranjan Village Andermanik 59:Dirbadhan S/o Natun Chandro Village Andermanik 60:Doyal Mohan S/o Sushil Kumar Village Andermanik 61:Ganya Henga S/o Jegotir Moy Village Andermanik 62:Gorul Chondro S/o Kandar Singh Village Andermanik 63:Govt. Primary School S/o Village Council Village Andermanik 64:Gulmani (rongengi) S/o Bipin Chndro Village Andermanik 65:Gulok Dhan S/o Kala Chobra (L) Village Andermanik 66:Gyana Lal S/o Kungo Kishore Village Andermanik 67:Gayna Moy S/o Niba Ronjon Page No.# 24/57 Village Andermanik 68:Gyana Ranjan S/o Kala Hula Village Andermanik 69:Jamani Kumar S/o Demkana Village Andermanik 70:Jedoni S/o Natun Chandro Village Andermanik 71:Joysudon Chakma S/o Mongoldon Village Andermanik 72:Jugesh Gandhi S/o Bashi Mohan Village Andermanik 73:Jyoti Shankar S/o Chandromoni Village Andermanik 74:Jyotir Moy S/o Juripya Village Andermanik 75:Jyotir Moy S/o Dhana Kumar Village Andermanik 76:Kala Chan S/o Lokhi Kumar Village Andermanik 77:Kala Chan S/o Bannu Moni Village Andermanik 78:Kala Hula Chakma S/o Gorsia Chakma Village Andermanik 79:Kala Ranjon S/o Amirali Page No.# 25/57 Village Andermanik 80:Kalachan S/o Banu Moni Village Andermanik 81:Kandhar Singh S/o Bajonga Village Andermanik 82:Kiron S/o Dola chan Village Andermanik 83:Kripa Lal S/o Surjolal Village Andermanik 84:Krishno Kumar S/o Nauram Village Andermanik 85:Lal Mohan S/o Ranjan Kumar Village Andermanik 86:Lalmohan S/o Higole Village Andermanik 87:Langti S/o Rames Chondro Village Andermanik 88:Lokhi Kumar S/o Ram Kumar Village Andermanik 89:Lokhi Mohan Chakma S/o Henathya Chakma Village Andermanik 90:Lokhidan Chakma S/o Natun Chandra Chakma (L) Village Andermanik 91:Lokhi Ranjon S/o Denga Page No.# 26/57 Village Andermanik 92:Lohit Chondro S/o Nishi Mohan Village Andermanik 93:Lolit Chondro S/o Amtola Village Andermanik 94:Lonka Kumar S/o Kala Village Andermanik 95:Lushai Kumar S/o Chittra Sen Village Andermanik 96:Man Kumar S/o Bihari Village Andermanik 97:Mandita S/o Chandala Village Andermanik 98:Mangapa S/o Jadap Chondro Village Andermanik 99:Mangopa Chakma S/o Jadap Chandro Chakma Village Andermanik 100:Maratua S/o Ananta Dhan Village Andermanik 101:Milon S/o Lendega Village Andermanik 102:Monu Ranjan S/o Sushi Kumar Village Andermanik 103:Monu Ranjan S/o Rangamu Page No.# 27/57 Village Andermanik 104:Mony Badro S/o Gulung Village Andermanik 105:Motil S/o Podo Kumar Village Andermanik 106:Motilal S/o Padha Kumar Village Andermanik 107:Nakku S/o Ishi Mohan Village Andermanik 108:Natun Kumar S/o Chitro Sen Village Andermanik 109:Nibaran S/o Chitrasen Village Andermanik 110:Nibaron Chakma S/o Chitrosen Village Andermanik 111:Niahr Bindu S/o Chirasen Village Andermanik 112:Nikal Boron S/o Baiti Village Andermanik 113:Nilo Kumar S/o Anil Kumar Village Andermanik 114:Nimal Kanti S/o Lolit Chondro Village Andermanik 115:Nirmal Kanti S/o Upendrolal Page No.# 28/57 Village Andermanik 116:Nishi Mohan S/o Bipin Chandro Village Andermanik 117:Nauram S/o Bngshi Nath Village Andermanik 118:Palan S/o Adilalal Village Andermanik 119:Phul Kamal S/o Dem Kana Village Andermanik 120:Prana Ranjan S/o Shusil Kumar Village Andermanik 121:Presby Church C/o Village Andermanik 122:Priochan S/o Shakti Village Andermanik 123:Priti Moy S/o Raj Kumar Village Andermanik 124:Punya ban S/o Kala Hula Village Andermanik 125:Probat Kusum S/o Kalachoga Village Andermanik 126:Punya Sen S/o Shushil Kumar Village Andermanik 127:Rahula S/o Bono Bijoy Village Andermanik Page No.# 29/57 128:Raisona S/o Dem Kana Village Andermanik 129:Raj Kusum S/o Dona Kumar Village Andermanik 130:Ranjan Kumar Chakma S/o Jay Chandra Chakma Village Andermanik 131:Ratnajit S/o Nakkia Village Andermanik 132:Rinisha S/o Bidhan Village Andermanik 133:Robi Kumar S/o Gulung (L) Village Andermanik 134:Rovi Chan S/o Bahanga Village Andermanik 135:Sanatia S/o Batti Village Andermanik 136:Sani Mohan S/o Bino Ram Village Andermanik 137:Shanto Moi S/o Lokhi Banu Village Andermanik 138:Sirojit S/o Ragani Kumar Village Andermanik 139:Sova Chand S/o Rojok Dhan Village Andermanik Page No.# 30/57 140:Subas Chondro S/o Gulung Village Andermanik 141:Subai Kanti S/o Muno Ranjon Village Andermanik 142:Subol Chondro S/o Hori Chondro Village Andermanik 143:Sukro Sen S/o Soda Gochya Village Andermanik 144:Suresh Chondro S/o Amtola Village Andermanik 145:Suresh Kanti S/o BipiChondro Village Andermanik 146:Suresh Ranjon S/o Nolini Ranjon Village Andermanik 147:Surjo Kumar S/o Lolit Chondra Village Andermanik 148:Suro Kumar S/o Sushil Kumar Village Andermanik 149:Surudha Kumar S/o Demkana Village Andermanik 150:Tlangliani S/o Bodishan Village Andermanik 151:Thanngura S/o Zuithanga Village Andermanik Page No.# 31/57 152:Uday Kumar S/o Battia Village Andermanik 153:Upendra Lal Chakma S/o Moni Chakma Village Andermanik 154:Vanlaltlana S/o Lala Village Andermanik 155:YCA Hall C/o Village Council Village Andermanik 156:Nandro Moni S/o Betya Village - Marpara 'N' 157:Anil Bosu S/o Subol Chandra Village - Marpara 'N' 158:Anil Kumar S/o Krinolal Village - Marpara 'N' 159:B.P.Hemonto S/o Soshi Mohan Village - Marpara 'N' 160:Barun Kumar S/o Pratap Chandra Village - Marpara 'N' 161:Baghya Dhan S/o Bilo Dash Village - Marpara 'N' 162:Biakhluna S/o Thanhranga Village - Marpara 'N' 163:Biro Kumar S/o Probojoi Village - Marpara 'N' Page No.# 32/57 164:C.Birish Kumar S/o Protap Chondra Village - Marpara 'N' 165:Dachia S/o Biroen Village - Marpara 'N' 166:Dino Chondro S/o Kala (L) Village - Marpara 'N' 167:Dononjoy S/o Thanglal Village - Marpara 'N' 168:Guno Joy S/o Subash Bosu Village - Marpara 'N' 169:Gyana Ranjan S/o Sarnila Village - Marpara 'N' 170:Gyana Baron S/o Probat Chondro Village - Marpara 'N' 171:Hualmawii D/o Rosiama Village - Marpara 'N' 172:Indro Rega S/o Kolganmoy Village - Marpara 'N' 173:Indrodon S/o Kaiserlung Village - Marpara 'N' 174:Jotirmoy S/o Probat Chondro Village - Lokhisuri 175:Kapmawia S/o Darngaia Village - Marpara 'N' Page No.# 33/57 176:Krishna Kumar S/o Nagorchand Village - Marpara 'N' 177:Laldingliana S/o Rongenga Village - Marpara 'N' 178:Lalhlimpuii S/o Liansawta Village - Marpara 'N' 179:Sangkawii D/o H.T.Khuma Village - Marpara 'N' 180:Lalnunsanga S/o Darringaia Village - Marpara 'N' 181:Lalramhluna S/o Darkunga Village - Marpara 'N' 182:Lalrimawia S/o Rokaia (L) Village - Marpara 'N' 183:Lalthlamuana S/o Saichhunga Village - Marpara 'N' 184:Lalzarmawia S/o Rokaia (L) Village - Marpara 'N' 185:Lalhmunsiami D/o Zohranga Village - Marpara 'N' 186:Nilam Ber S/o Saikodon Village - Marpara 'N' 187:Notun Kumar S/i Nilodas Village - Marpara 'N' Page No.# 34/57 188:Notun Joy S/o Purno Kumar Village - Marpara 'N' 189:Osina S/o Kisur Kumar Village - Marpara 'N' 190:Poddo Saii S/o Lokhidro Village - Marpara 'N' 191:Podhosoba S/o Bagahat Village - Marpara 'N' 192:Zothana S/o Laldingliana Village - Marpara 'N' 193:Pollin S/o Birash Village - Marpara 'N' 194:Probat Kusum S/o Birosen (L) Village - Marpara 'N' 195:Prodip S/o Shanti Kumart Village - Lokhisuri 196:Punorani S/o Krishnabha Kumar Village - Marpara 'N' 197:R.L.Dawngliana S/o R.Taia Village - Marpara 'N' 198:Radnadip S/o Sisimohan Village - Marpara 'N' 199:Rasdhon S/o Rani Chandra Village - Marpara 'N' Page No.# 35/57 200:Robi Chondro S/o Hulo Village - Marpara 'N' 201:Robidon S/o Chandro Dash Village - Marpara 'N' 202:Ranjoni Kumar S/o Indrasen Village - Marpara 'N' 203:Sadona Devi S/o Madhon Kumar (L) Village - Marpara 'N' 204:Santi Kumar S/o Thiromon Village - Marpara 'N' 205:Santibijai S/o Sodisandro Village - Marpara 'N' 206:Sengu S/o Nisi Kumar Village - Marpara 'N' 207:Shadi S/o Joimohan Village - Marpara 'N' 208:Sigonbi S/o Borat Kumar Village - Marpara 'N' 209:Sulomoni S/o Robi Chandra Village - Marpara 'N' 210:Sumitimawi S/o Saigamoni Village - Marpara 'N' 211:Surolota S/o Lokikumar (L) Village - Marpara 'N' Page No.# 36/57 212:Suresh Donon S/o Bengu Village - Marpara 'N' 213:Susanko S/o Sidili Village - Marpara 'N' 214:Sutin Chandro S/o Punyo Moni Village - Marpara 'N' 215:Syamal Kanti S/o Baro Chandro Village - Marpara 'N' 216:Thanhranga S/o Parkunga Village - Marpara 'N' 217:VFDC Plantation Village - Marpara 'N' 218:Vikram S/o Sygonmoki Village - Marpara 'N' 219:Zorina S/o R.Taia Village - Marpara 'N' 220:Babeswar S/o Nikamal Village - Rajiv nagar 221:Basanti S/o Suresh Village - Rajiv nagar 222:Bupen S/o Sonamiga Village - Rajiv nagar 223:Bibennia Chakma S/o Sugomoni Village - Rajiv nagar Page No.# 37/57 224:Bijoy Singh S/o Chandra Dhan Village - Rajiv nagar 225:Binayan S/o Madudhani Village - Rajiv nagar 226:Binento S/o Bubonjoy Village - Rajiv nagar 227:Bunoto S/o Nishi Kumar Village - Rajiv nagar 228:Buddha Mala S/o Sukra Moni (L) Village - Rajiv nagar 229:Chandra Bahu S/o Sangkasur Village - Rajiv nagar 230:Chigonchan S/o Reboti Mohan Village - Rajiv nagar 231:Gyna Ranjon S/o Juropya Village - Rajiv nagar 232:Gyana Ranjon S/o Gopajoy Village - Rajiv nagar 233:H.Lalrintlunga S/o Saithanga Village-Badalsuri 234:J.Nandu S/o Lara Chandra Village - Rajiv nagar 235:Jyoti Ranjon S/o Reboti Ranjon Village - Rajiv nagar Page No.# 38/57 236:Jyotika S/o Kalyan Moy Village - Rajiv nagar 237:Kokilsona S/o Reboti Ranjan Village - Rajiv nagar 238:Lalnghakliani D/o Zosanga (L) Village - Rajiv nagar 239:Mili S/o Shoba ranjon Village - Rajiv nagar 240:Mitra S/o Surgachi Village - Rajiv nagar 241:Nanda Rani S/o Monu ranjan Village - Rajiv nagar 242:Nihar Bala S/o Ananto Sen Village - Rajiv nagar 243:Nilupal Chakma S/o Suresh Biahri Chakma Village - Rajiv nagar 244:Niroloda S/o Gyana ranjan Village - Rajiv nagar 245:Nishi Chondro S/o Lolissya Village - Rajiv nagar 246:P.C.Zosangliana S/o P.C.Rualkhuma Village - Badal Suri 247:Pingata S/o Kandra Village - Rajiv nagar Page No.# 39/57 248:Proti Mohan S/o Robindra Village - Rajiv nagar 249:Punyosen S/o Indromoan Village - Rajiv nagar 250:Rajiv Nagar Area Village - Rajiv nagar 251:Rinisha S/o Bidhar Village - Rajiv nagar 252:Rupan S/o Ramini Ranjan Village - Rajiv nagar 253:Sapna Kumar S/o Sangkasur Village - Rajiv nagar 254:Sadhan Kumar S/o Kada Singh Village - Rajiv nagar 255:Songhita S/o Lolitchiga Village - Rajiv nagar 256:Suresh Gandhi S/o Manu Ranjan Village - Rajiv nagar 257:Vivekananda S/o Brojo Mohan Village - Rajiv nagar 258:The State of Mizoram R/b the Secetary to the Govt. of Mizoram Home Department Aizawl 259:The Deputy Commissioner and District Collector Mamit District Mizoram Page No.# 40/57 260:The General Manager National Building Construction Company (NBCC) Chaltlang Aizawl Mizoram 261:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Land Revenue and Settlement Department Govt. of Mizoram Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms Zairemsangpuii Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. L.H. Lianhrima Sr.Adv. for R1- R257 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 15.10.2025 (Marli Vankung, J) Heard Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents. 2. This is an application filed u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay of 583 days in filing the appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, passed by the Single Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 194 of 2016. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants/appellants are aggrieved by the Judgment and Order 21.07.2023, wherein, the applicants/appellants were directed to pay the total amount of the Page No.# 41/57 Supplementary Award No.1 of 2009 (Deemed Damage) and the solatium and interest payable to the instant opposite parties/respondents under section 23 (1A) and (2) of the LA Act, within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The learned counsel submits that the said order is in respect of the deemed damages to the properties of the respondents, for which the applicant/appellants are not liable to pay any compensation for damages, since the area within the deemed damages was beyond alignment of the construction of Indo – Bangladesh Border Fencing (IBB Fence). 4. The learned CGC submitted that the delay of 583 days in filling the appeal against the impugned judgment and order was not due to the negligence or inaction of the applicants and the reason for the delay has been explained in detail at Paragraph 5 to Paragraph 103 of the condonation for delay application. 5. The learned CGC submitted that the impugned Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, was received on 24.07.2023, and the same was forwarded to Ministry of Home Affairs (hereinafter referred to as MHA) on the same day. Thereafter, the NBCC Ltd. had approached the Director (BM – III) MHA, GOI New Delhi on 11.09.2023 to deposit the awarded along with solatium and interest payable to the petitioners u/s 23 (I A) and (II of the LA Act, 1894) as calculated by the Deputy Commissioner on 23.08.2023. The MHA took some time for consultation and decided to file an appeal against the impugned order on 20.09.2023, however, the MHA had mistakenly thought that the BSF was a party Page No.# 42/57 in the said WP(C) No. 194 of 2016 and on 20.09.2023 and the BSF was informed to file an appeal against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023. However, the BSF, not being arrayed as a party in the said WP(C) No. 194 of 2016, had no idea about the impugned Judgment & Order and had searched for the documents of the impugned Order dated 21.07.2023. The learned counsel submitted that this was the main reason for the delay since the BSF was not having any documents with them. The learned CGC submitted that paragraph 9 to 19 is the detailed account of the steps taken by the BSF while searching for the said impugned Judgment & Order, since the history of the case and the documents were not found in the possession of the BSF. The BSF had then approached the NBCC requesting them for the same since the BSF was asked to file an appeal. The SHQ BSF had also requested the DC Mamit for information regarding the case and had made several attempts to obtain the brief history, para wise comments and status of the case as no record/document with regard to the said writ petition was available. The 38 Bn BSF had also approached the learned CGC on 02.01.2024 asking for the copies of the documents wherein they were informed on 12.01.2024 that BSF not being a party, no documents could be handed over to them. Thereafter on 06.01.2024, 38 Bn BSF informed SHQ BSF Aizawl which in turn informed FTR HQ BSF M&C and FHQ BSF on 12.01.2024, 16.01.2024 and 23.01.2024 respectively. Copies of the various dated communications in support Page No.# 43/57 of the above steps taken by BSF are annexed as Annexure I to Annexure XIX. 6. The learned CGC further submitted that from para 20 of the application MHA vide letter dated 07.05.2024 communicated to BSF that GM of NBCC had been informed to render for necessary assistance and the BSF for filling an appeal/SLP. On 16.05.2024 NBCC requested for status regarding filling of SLP/appeal. Annexure VI being the communication between NBCC and BSF asking for the history and facts of the case. On 01.06.2024 38 Bn BSF approached the CGC for her opinion wherein, on 14.06.2024, the CGC after various communications between the BSF, GM and NBCC, pointed out that the BSF was not a party in the Writ Petition No. 194 of 2016 and therefore, BSF had no channel to file the appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, before the Appellate Court. The same too was informed to the MHA through SHQ and on 02.08.2024, as per the directions of MHA, the 38th BN BSF requested the learned CGC to prepare for filing a writ appeal or file a SLP before the Supreme Court and on 07.08.2024, HAQ BSF Aizawl, informed the MHA that the impugned order should be challenged in the Appellate Court i.e., Divisional Bench Gauhati High Court and not the Supreme Court directly. Thereafter the HAQ BSF sought advice from the Headquarters at Kolkata and also to the Headquarters at New Delhi, wherein, copies of the necessary documents to file the appeal was also called for. Copies of the various dated communications in support of the same are annexed as Annexures XXII to Annexure XXX. Page No.# 44/57 7. The learned CGC submitted that the MHA after being informed that the BSF was not a party in the Writ petitioner, had however, in their letter dated 14.10.2024 informed BSF to file the appeal (Annexure XLIX). The learned CGC further explained that the MHA had involved the BSF because the construction of the works done by NBCC was done under the vigilance of BSF with the NBCC and that MHA is only the Nodal Ministry. On 29.11.2024 the draft writ appeal was received from BSF, wherein the learned CGC on finding that the draft needed to be redrafted since it was not as per the norms of the Gauhati High Court on 13.12.2024 the CGC had asked for the soft copy which was personally handed over on 19.12.2024 by representative of BSF. The CGC had then taken steps to prepared a fresh draft which has been explained in detail from para 52 to para 63 of the condonation of delay application and time was also taken to obtain the certified two copies of the impugned Judgment & Order which was applied for on 15.01.2025, since the High Court was not fully functional during winter vacations and the certified true copy was furnished on 16.01.2025. Thereafter, after the preparation of the draft writ appeal, the same was again sent to BSF and MHA for approval and signatures. The various communications between the CGC and the BSF with MHA are annexed as annexures XLIX to LXX. 8. The learned CGC also submitted that due to the inadvertent delay in filling the writ appeal, an Interlocutory application was required to be filed, for which, on 20.12.2024 the BSF and MHA were again asked to draft the I.A and were also Page No.# 45/57 informed that the High Court office was closed for winter vacations and would re- open only on 13.01.2025. Time was taken by the BSF to collect the supporting documents for the delay by communicating with the MHA for their vetting and approval and after various communications between the Ftr HQ BSF M&C,SHQ BSF Aizawl and MHA on 28.01.2025 the Interlocutory application was handed over to the CGC duly signed and notarized, however, the CGC found that certain corrections and rectifications were required to be made for which it was sent back and after numerous communications, the vetted RFA and I.A signed and approved by the competent authority was handed over to the CGC and duly filed on 24.03.2025. 9. The learned CGC submitted that due to the mistaken impression that BSF was a party in the writ petition, time was taken to obtain the necessary documents by BSF, which had inadvertently caused the delay in filling the Writ Appeal, which was not due to any fault or negligence on the part of the applicants but due to the mistaken impression that the BSF could file the appeal. The learned CGC further explained that the MHA had involved the BSF because the construction of the works was done by NBCC under the vigilance of BSF and MHA being only the Nodal Ministry all the ground works for filling the appeal and contacting the CGC at Aizawl was required to be done by the BSF. 10. The learned CGC thus submitted that the steps taken by the applicants in filing the appeal had been clearly explained in an almost day to day basis, Page No.# 46/57 wherein, it can be seen that the delay was not due to the negligence or in action of the appellants and in support of her submission the learned CGC has relied on the Judgment of the Apex Court in N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in 1988 7 SCC 123 (Para 9, 10, 11 & 12) and also relied in the Judgment of the Apex Court in State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani, reported in 1996 3SCC 132 (Para 11), wherein the Apex court held that Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory and there is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. 11. Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned senior counsel for the respondent, on the other hand submitted that the impugned judgment and order was passed on 21.07.2023 and the period of limitation as per the Limitation Act is 30 days, wherein, the copy of the impugned judgment and order was received by the appellant on 24.07.2023 and the appellant had decided to file an appeal on 20.09.2023. However, the appellants had taken as many as 113 days after the decision was taken to prefer an appeal and had approached the CGC only on 02.01.2024. There was no proper explanation for the inordinate delay except various official communications within the concerned Page No.# 47/57 departments which is not a proper explanation. 12. The learned senior counsel further submitted that on 14.06.2024, the learned CGC had given her legal opinion and opined that the applicant/appellants should file an appeal and on 05.08.2024 the CGC wrote to the BSF Commandant that if the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 were aggrieved, they should file an appeal before the Division Bench, Gauhati High Court, however, the writ appeal was filed belatedly on 20.03.2025 with no plausible explanation. 13. The learned senior counsel submitted that in spite of the fact that the applicant/appellants had decided to file an appeal against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023 on 20.09.2023, however, a certified true copy of the impugned judgment and order was applied for belatedly only on 15.01.2025 and the same was furnished to the applicant on 16.01.2025. The learned senior counsel submitted that no explanation has been given by the applicant for the late application for a copy of the certified true copy. 14. The learned senior counsel also submitted that the huge delay of 583 days has not been adequately explained wherein the Writ Appeal was finally filed on 20.03.2025, after more than 442 days from the date of approaching the learned CGC. The learned senior counsel pointed out that even after receiving a certified true copy of the impugned judgment and order, the applicant/appellant took 64 days to file the present appeal without any sufficient cause for the delay. The learned senior counsel thus submitted that considering the above facts and Page No.# 48/57 circumstances, no sufficient cause for the delay has been made out by the applicants and the present application for condonation of a delay of 583 days is liable to be dismissed and set aside. 15. The learned senior counsel has relied on the judgment of the Apex court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Tata Yodogawa Limited & Anr., reported in (2015) 9 SCC 102 (para 2) and the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this court in State of Assam & Ors. Vs. Gita Rani Kalita & Anr., reported in 2017 (2) GLT 1190 (para 9). The learned senior counsel further submitted that the Apex court in Postmaster General & Ors. Vs. Living Media India Limited & Ors., reported in (2012) 3 SCC 563 (para 27, 28 & 29) held that there should be a reasonable and acceptable reason for the condonation of delay and that the condonation of delay is an exception and not a rule. 16. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties and we have also perused the documents on record. It is seen that after Judgment & Order of the single bench of this Court in WPC No. 194 of 2016 dated 21.07.2023 was received by the applicants/ appellants on 24.07.2023. Thereafter, the Deputy Commission in compliance with the Judgment in WP(C)194 of 2016 had calculated the compensation amount due to the petitioners and the wherein, the National Building Corporation Company (also referred to as NBCC) had approached the Director (BM – III) Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), GOI, New Delhi, to deposit the awarded amount along with the solatium and interest Page No.# 49/57 payable to the petitioners u/s 23 (I A) and (II) of the LA Act, 1894 as calculated by the Deputy Commissioner. The applicant/MHA after considering the matter, took the decision on 20.09.2023, to file an appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023 in WPC No. 194 of 2026. Accordingly, the BSF was informed to file SLP/Writ Appeal against the said Judgment dated 21.07.2023. We have noticed that there were series of communications between the FHQ BSF New Delhi, FTR HQ BSF M&C, SHQ BSF Aizawl, for taking steps to file the writ appeal. However, since the BSF was not made a party in WP(C) No. 194 of 2016, the BSF could not obtained the brief history, para wise comments and status of the case as no record/document were available with the BSF. We have perused the documents annexed as Annexures – IV dated 22.09.2023 to Annexure – XXI dated 16.05.2024, wherein, the BSF through series of communications with the NBCC and the MHA had taken steps to the required documents for filling of the appeal/SLP. 17. We have noted the several communications between BSF and GM NBCC, wherein the BSF had also contacted the CGC and the CGC on 14.06.2024 informed them that the BSF was not a party in the Writ Petition No. 194 of 2016 and that BSF had no channel to file the appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, however, the MHA through their letter dated 14.10.2024 still informed BSF to file the appeal. The communications are all supported by documents Annexed as annexures XXV to XLIX. 18. We find that though the learned CGC has explained that the MHA has Page No.# 50/57 insisted in involving the BSF because the construction of the works done by NBCC was done within the area and under the vigilance of BSF with the NBCC and that MHA is only the Nodal Ministry, however we are of the view that the MHA being the Nodal Ministry was required to be pro-active and be prompt in the filing of the writ appeal. 19. We find that thereafter, there were series of communications between SHQ BSF Aizawl, FTR HQ BSF M&C and 38 BN BSF for drafting the writ appeal or SLP in the Supreme court. The CGC was also contacted for taking steps to file the appeal on 19.11.2024, 38 Bn BSF submitted Brief History and self contained note of the case to 191 Bn BSF for further submission to Ftr HQ M&C wherein on 29.11.2024 the CGC was requested to prepare a draft appeal. In a letter dated 20.12.2024, the learned CGC had forwarded the Writ appeal drafted by her to 191 Bn BSF and also intimated the need for filing a condonation for delay application. Supporting documents annexed as Annexures – L dated 15.10.2024 to LXXI dated 20.12.2024. 20. We have perused the various communications between CGC and BSF and MHA annexed as Annexures – LXXIII dated 23.12.2024 which is regarding the draft Interlocutory Application drafted by the CGC and thereafter were various communications made by the BSF, MHA and the CGC to take steps in the preparation of the draft writ appeal, along with the draft Interlocutory Application for the condonation of delay in filing the writ appeal, wherein all the documents showing the steps taken by the MHA and BSF was required to be enclosed. Annexures LXXIII dated Page No.# 51/57 23.12.2024 to annexure LXXXI dated 28.12.2024 indicated the various steps taken by BSF and MHA showing that the BSF have taken steps to collect the required documents through the various steps of communications to file the Interlocutory Application for seeking the condonation of the delay which had occurred during the course of the communications and efforts made by the BSF on being directed by applicants/MHA to file the appeal. On 11.01.2025 the BSF handed over the vetted Interlocutory Application to the learned CGC and thevetted Writ appeal was also handed over to the CGC on 13.01.2025 which had required further corrections and the needful was done wherein the representatives of the BSF and the MHA had met the CGC and after series of communications a fresh Writ Appeal and an updated Interlocutory application was ready and signed by the concerned. The steps taken indicated in the Annexures LXXXIV dated 11.01.2025 to XCV dated 10.02.2025. We have further perused the annexures XCVI dated 12.02.2025 to Annexure - CV dated 13.03.2025, wherein the final vetted condonation for delay application was ready and handed over to the CGC after being duly signed by MHA. 21. On perusal of the documents annexed from Annexures I – CV, we find that the applicants through the concerned BSF have delayed the matter through various communications are mostly due to considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process. 22. We also find that there was a delay in applying for the Certified True Copy of the impugned Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, only on 15.01.2025 which was Page No.# 52/57 furnished on 16.01.2025 and no explanation is forth coming for the this huge delay in applying for the Certified True Copy of the Judgment and order which was passed on 21.07.2023 and when a decision to file an appeal was already taken on 20.09.2023. This court finds that this depicts the nonchalant attitude of the applicants/Ministry of Home Affairs/MHA and NBBC who were the respondents in WP(C) No. 194 of 2016 in filing the writ petition. 23. At this stage, we find that the Apex Court in Balakrishna Vs. M. Krishna Murti (supra) had held as follows:- “9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. The primary function of a court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time-limit fixed for approaching the court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy Page No.# 53/57 promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. …. ”The law of limitation is thus founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim interest reipublicae up sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be put to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly. The idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time. 12. A court knows that refusal to condone delay would result in foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumptions that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575 : (1969) 1 SCR 1006] and State of W.B. v. Administrator, Howrah Municipality [(1972) 1 SCC 366 : AIR 1972 SC 749] .’’ 24. We find that in the case relied upon by the learned senior counsel in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Tata Yodogawa Limited & Anr.(supra) the Apex court had not allowed the condonation of the delay of 62 days by observing that that no attempt was made to explain the cause of the delay and there was no cogent and possible explanation. 25. We have also noted that observations of the Apex court in Postmaster General v. Living Media India Ltd., (supra) is aptly applicable in the instant case Page No.# 54/57 wherein we find it appropriate to reproduce the following paragraphs of the judgment : “24. After referring various earlier decisions, taking very lenient view in condoning the delay, particularly, on the part of the Government and the government undertaking, this Court observed as under: (PundlikJalam case [(2008) 17 SCC 448 : (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 907] , SCC pp. 457-58, paras 29-30) “29. It needs no restatement at our hands that the object for fixing time-limit for litigation is based on public policy fixing a life span for legal remedy for the purpose of general welfare. They are meant to see that the parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but avail their legal remedies promptly. Salmond in his Jurisprudence states that the laws come to the assistance of the vigilant and not of the sleepy. 30. Public interest undoubtedly is a paramount consideration in exercising the court's discretion wherever conferred upon it by the relevant statutes. Pursuing stale claims and multiplicity of proceedings in no manner subserves public interest. Prompt and timely payment of compensation to the land losers facilitating their rehabilitation/resettlement is equally an integral part of public policy. Public interest demands that the State or the beneficiary of acquisition, as the case may be, should not be allowed to indulge in any act to unsettle the settled legal rights accrued in law by resorting to avoidable litigation unless the claimants are guilty of deriving benefit to which they are otherwise not entitled, in any fraudulent manner. Page No.# 55/57 One should not forget the basic fact that what is acquired is not the land but the livelihood of the land losers. These public interest parameters ought to be kept in mind by the courts while exercising the discretion dealing with the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Dragging the land losers to courts of law years after the termination of legal proceedings would not serve any public interest. Settled rights cannot be lightly interfered with by condoning inordinate delay without there being any proper explanation of such delay on the ground of involvement of public revenue. It serves no public interest.” 25. We have already extracted the reasons as mentioned in the “better affidavit” sworn by Mr. Aparajeet Pattanayak, SSRM, Air Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi. It is relevant to note that in the said affidavit, the Department has itself mentioned and is aware of the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court in Office of the Chief Postmaster v. Living Media India Ltd. [(2009) 8 AD 201 (Del)] as 11-9-2009. Even according to the deponent, their counsel had applied for the certified copy of the said judgment only on 8-1-2010 and the same was received by the Department on the very same day. There is no explanation for not applying for the certified copy of the impugned judgment on 11-9-2009 or at least within a reasonable time. The fact remains that the certified copy was applied for only on 8- 1-2010 i.e. after a period of nearly four months. 28. Though we are conscious of the fact that in a matter of condonation of delay when there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides, a Page No.# 56/57 liberal concession has to be adopted to advance substantial justice, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances, the Department cannot take advantage of various earlier decisions. The claim on account of impersonal machinery and inherited bureaucratic methodology of making several notes cannot be accepted in view of the modern technologies being used and available. The law of limitation undoubtedly binds everybody, including the Government. 29. In our view, it is the right time to inform all the government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay and there was bona fide effort, there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file was kept pending for several months/years due to considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process. The government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.” 26. We thus find that, in the instant case, having perused of the bulky documents annexures in the condonation application, the delay was due to considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process of filling the appeal andon perusal of the dates of the communications between the SHQ BSF Aizawl, FTR HQ BSF M&C, 38 BN BSF, NBBC and MHA, we find that there are gaps in the dates which remain unexplained causing the inordinate delay, nor is there any explanation for not applying the Page No.# 57/57 Certified True Copy within the prescribed period and the true copy was applied for only on 15.01.2025. We are therefore of the considered view that the concerned authorities involved, have failed performed their duties with diligence and commitment to ensure that the writ appeal was filed promptly while it is seen that the authorities were aware all along that there was already a huge delay while the various communications made between SHQ BSF Aizawl, FTR HQ BSF M&C and38 BN BSF, NBBC and MHA were made. 27. In view of the above observations, we are of the considered view that the delay of 583 days in filing the appeal the Judgment & Order dated 21.07.2023, has not been sufficiently explained and therefore find no grounds to condone the delay of 583 days in filing the writ appeal against the Judgment & Order of the single bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 194 of 2016. 28. Accordingly, I.A No. 52 of 2025 stands dismissed and disposed of. 29. On disposal of the instant I.A the connected writ appeal registered as WA No. 5 of 2025 arising out of WP(C) No. 194 of 2016 also stands dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant