Page No.# 1/12 GAHC020003042022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : C. REVN/6/2022 SHRI. NYAMO MURRY S/O LATE PHYOBEN MURRY, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT B.KHEL, WOKHA VILLAGE, WOKHA NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS THROUGH TH E COMMISSIONER, NAGALAND KOHIMA 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WOKHA, NAGALAND 3:THE HEAD DOBASHI DISTRICT CUSTOMARY COURT WOKHA NAGALAND 4:SHRI. YANGKHOSAO MURRY S/O LATE PHYOPHIO MURRY RESIDENT OF TOURIST LODGE COLONY WOKHA NAGALAND 5:SHRI. KHOZAMO MURRY S/O LATE ZACHAMO MURRY RESIDENT OF TSUMUNG COLONY WOKHA TOW Advocate for the Petitioner : SUPONGWATI WALLING, R ATSULA KIPS Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, Page No.# 2/12 BEFORE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 17.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. Supongwati Walling, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. V. Zhimomi, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 2. None has appeared for the private respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 3. It appears on perusal of the records that the notices were also issued to the private respondent Nos. 4 and 5 through the substituted mode and by order dated 18.10.2024 this Court held the notice issued to the private respondent Nos. 4 and 5 has duly served, therefore, this hearing was done ex-parte against the said respondents. 4. This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Shri Nyamo Murry, impugning the Land Dispute Settlement Report No. DCC-WKA/LD-1/2022 dated 23.02.2022 and the partial modification of said Land Dispute Settlement dated 23.02.2022 made by the Head Dobashi, District Customary Court, Wokha, Nagaland. The petitioner has also impugned the Notice No. DCW/LR- 15(B)/NH2/2020 dated 01.06.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland. 5. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant revision petition, in brief, are that:- Page No.# 3/12 (i) The petitioner has claimed that he had purchased a plot of land by way of a sale deed from the elders of the clan of Mipongshan-Rui of Wokha Village to whom the land belonged, at a consideration amount of Rs.5,000/-, on 09.07.1985. The copy of said sale deed is annexed by the petitioner in this revision petition as Annexure-1. (ii) On 5th of July 2021, the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland issued a notification regarding the damage compensation for work of widening of existing single/intermediate road to 2 lane road from km 72.40 to 83.0 on National Highway No. 61 and claims and objections were invited from the affected land owners. In the said notification, the appended list shows at serial No. 187 to 192 land of the petitioner which has been shown as “disputed land”. The petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner Wokha, Nagaland by filing a representation, on 12.07.2021, whereby the petitioner claimed that he is the absolute owner of the plot of land measuring 40 feet breadth X 143 ft. length bounded by West-Junction, East-Mhonjan, South Church Road, North Mokokchung Road and called for a clarification from the Deputy Commissioner in that regard. (iii) The petitioner had again filed a representation on 18.11.2021 before the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland praying for rectification of the list of affected persons which is appended to notification dated 5th July, 2021 and also prayed for putting a hold to payment of compensation in respect of land mentioned in Serial No. 187- Page No.# 4/12 192 of the said list. (iv) Thereafter, on 18.11.2021, the respondent No. 4 also filed a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland wherein it was mentioned that the land mentioned at Serial No. 187-192 belongs to respondent No. 4 and a request was made to held up the payment until the matter was amicably settled. (v) Thereafter, on 15.01.2022 by a letter under reference number DCW/LR-15(B)/NH2/2022, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland requested the Head Head Dobashi, Wokha, Nagaland to verify and ascertain the actual land owners of the of the disputed areas and submit a detailed report to the Deputy Commissioner Office on or before 28th January, 2022. It was also directed that all necessary land documents are to be thoroughly scrutinized before the matter is settled. (vi) On receipt of aforesaid letter dated 15.01.2022, the Head Dobashi, District Customary Court, Wokha, Nagaland issued summons to the petitioner as well as to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5, on 29th January, 2022, to appear before the District Customary Court with all supporting documents and witnesses on 2nd February, 2022. Thereafter, on 6th of February, 2022 the statement of the petitioner was recorded along with the statement of the respondents and his witnesses. On 16th February, 2022 Head Dobashi, District Customary Court, Wokha, Nagaland issued summons to the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 again to appear before Page No.# 5/12 the Customary Court on 23rd of February, 2022 for final settlement of the dispute and thereafter on the next day i.e., on 23rd February 2022 the Land Dispute Settlement Report was issued under reference No. DCC-WKA/LD-1/2022 dated 23.02.2022 whereby it was mentioned that the matter could not be resolved amicably between the parties and, therefore, the Customary Court has to give its verdict on the basis of the findings through spot verification and on the basis of documents exhibited before the Court. (vii) In the Land Dispute Settlement Report it was decided as follows:- “1. Since the land in question measures around 228 feet in length and breadth with 39 feet tapering at the end towards police point 'Y' junction with 5 feet. The Court hereby decide that the land from within the measured area of 228 feet from 'Y' junction till electric Pole measuring 113 shall be allowed to own by the Clan of Thungchanrhomo's Rui of Wokha Village and from Electric Pole till the Footsteps (Towards Mhonjan's complex) measuring 115 shall continue to be owned by Shri Nyamo Murry (Miphungshan's Rui) 2. However, Shri Nyamo Murry, shall have the right to claim compensation over the structures/Shops within the dispute area of 228 feet. 3. Other benefits, other than structures/shops, Thungchanrhomo's Ruis shall be allowed to claim the right of ownership over the land. 4. In this regard, Authority may kindly access the disputed land of 228 feet and earmark which serial of land falls within this disputed land. 5. That in the event of non acceptance of this verdict by the disputing parties, the right to ownership over the disputed land shall be Page No.# 6/12 determined through Oath taking as per Lotha Naga Traditions”. (viii) Thereafter, on the same day i.e., on 23rd of February, 2022, a partial modification of Land Dispute Settlement was also issued by the District Customary Court wherein some alterations were made in the observations made under Serial No. 3 of the Land Dispute Settlement Report dated 23rd February, 2022. (ix) It is pertinent to mention herein that thereafter on 26th April, 2022, the Extra Assistant Commissioner (Sadar), Wokha, wrote a letter to Head Dobashi, District Customary Court, Wokha, Nagaland wherein the Head Dobashi was directed to summon the disputing parties again and determine the right of ownership over the disputed land by administering oath to the petitioner as per Lotha Naga Traditions as mentioned in Point No. 5 of the Land Dispute Settlement report dated 23rd February, 2022 and submit a report in that regard on or before 7th of May, 2022. (x) The District Customary Court, Wokha, Nagaland accordingly issued summons to both the parties on 28th of April, 2022 directing the petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to appear before it on 5th of May, 2022. However, on 1st of June, 2022, the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, Nagaland issued notice under reference No. DCW/LR-15(B)/NH2/2022 dated 1st of June, 2022 whereby the petitioner was directed to clear/remove the standing properties/structure following within the premises of the Thungchanrhomo Rui’s Clan land (113 Ft.) Page No.# 7/12 as demarcated by the District Customary Court, Wokha. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the instant case there has been violation of the provisions of Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 which is applicable to any proceeding before any Customary Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the instant case civil rights of the parties were decided by the District Customary Court without any civil case forwarded to it by the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with Section 23A of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the mandate of Rule 24(1) of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 was also not followed in the instant case. He submits that the Deputy Commissioner wrote the letter dated 15th of January, 2022 to the Head Dobashi, Wokha only to verify and ascertain the actual land owner and submit a detailed report to it back and no civil case was referred to the Head Dobashi for disposal. He also submits that even if it is assumed that by letter dated 15.01.2022 dispute was referred to the District Customary Court, the District Customary Court was required to follow the procedure as provided under Section 24 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937. He submits that no plaint was filed by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on whose complaint the matter was referred to the District Customary Court. He also submits that neither any opportunity was granted to the petitioner to file a written statement in his defence nor any issues were framed in this case. He further submits that even the Page No.# 8/12 petitioner was not allowed to adduce evidence of his witnesses. He also submits that after purchase of the land in question in the year 1985, the petitioner is in possession of the said land. He also submits that in this case the reference made to the District Customary Court and proceedings before the District Customary Court were not in accordance with the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937. Hence, he prays that the impugned Land Dispute Settlement Report dated 23.02.2022, the partial modification of the said land dispute settlement on 23.02.2023 as well as the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner on 01st of June, 2022 may be set aside. 8. On the other hand, Mr. V. Zhimomi, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that in this case the dispute was referred to the Customary Court, Wokha by the SDO (Civil), Wokha by letter dated 15th of January, 2022 in pursuant to the mandate of Section 23A of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937. He submits that both the parties were afforded sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their case. He also submits that the petitioner was afforded opportunity to take oath in accordance with the Lotha Naga Traditions, however, the petitioner declined to take the oath citing his own personal reasons and, therefore, he cannot agitate the issue again before this Court. 9. The learned Government Advocate further submits that the petitioner had an appellate forum in preferring an appeal against the impugned verdict of the Customary Court before the Deputy Page No.# 9/12 Commissioner in pursuant to Rule 31 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937, however, without availing the said opportunity the petitioner has rushed to this Court for invoking its supervisory jurisdiction. Hence, he prays for dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the materials available on record. 11. As per Rule 23 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, the administration of Civil Justice in the State of Nagaland has been entrusted to the Deputy Commissioner, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Customary Courts constituted under chapter IVA of the Rules. 12. It also appears that Rule 23A provides that Dobashi shall try and decide civil cases only as may be referred to them by the Deputy Commissioner or Additional Deputy Commissioner or Assistant to Deputy Commissioner as the case may be. 13. Further, newly Rule 24 provides for the procedure to be adopted while considering a civil dispute by the Dobashi/Customary Court. 14. In the instant case, if we peruse the materials on record, it appears that on receipt of a complaint by respondent No. 4 by the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha on 18.11.2021, the dispute was referred to the Head Dobashi, Wokha by the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha to verify and ascertain the actual owners of the disputed area and submit a detailed report to the Office of the Deputy Page No.# 10/12 Commissioner. It appears that the complaint filed by the respondent No. 4 before the Deputy Commissioner was not a detailed complaint neither the requirements of particulars to be mentioned in a plaint as provided under Rule 24(1) of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland was stated in the said complaint. 15. Even, if it is assumed that by the letter dated 15.01.2022, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Wokha referred the dispute to the Head Dobashi, Wokha for a decision the Customary Court while deciding the said dispute was required to follow the mandate of Rule 24 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 by asking the complainant to file a plaint containing all the necessary particulars as mentioned in Rule 24 of the aforesaid Rules, however, same was not done in this case. 16. Moreover, it also appears that though the respondent was allowed to adduce evidence of the witnesses, the petitioner’s witnesses were not examined by the District Customary Court. Further, if we peruse the Land Dispute Settlement Report, it appears out of the disputed land measuring 228 Ft. in length, the land measuring 113 Ft. was held to be owned by the respondent No. 4. However, in the Land Dispute Settlement Report, however, no reasons have been mentioned in the Land Dispute Settlement Report for coming to the said findings by the Customary Court. The only mention in the said report is that the findings were on the basis of spot verification and documents exhibited before the Court. Neither the report of the spot verification nor the documents relied upon by the Customary Court find any specific mention in the Land Dispute Settlement Report. Page No.# 11/12 17. It appears that in the instant case, the requirement of Rule 23A and Rule 24 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937, was not followed from the very inception. 18. In this regard, the rulings cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of “Ritesh Tiwari and Anr. –Vs- State of UP and Ors.” reported in “(2010) 10 SCC 677” is relevant wherein the Apex Court has observed that it is settled legal proposition that if an order is bad in its inception, it does not get sanctified at a later stage. The subsequent action/development cannot validate the action which was not lawful at its inception. It is further observed that it would be beyond the competence of any authority to validate such an order and if an order is at the initial stage is bad in law, then all further proceedings consequent thereto will be non-est and have to be necessarily set aside. 19. Since, in the instant case, the matter was not amicably settled between the parties and Customary Court was called upon to decide the said dispute which was civil in nature, it was incumbent upon the Customary Court to follow the procedural requirement of the mandates of Rule 24(1) of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 which were not followed in this case. Hence, this Court is of considered opinion that the Land Dispute Settlement Report No. DCC-WKA/LD-1/2022 dated 23.02.2022 and the partial modification of the Land Dispute Settlement dated 23.02.2022 is liable to be set aside which this Court accordingly does. 20. The notices issued by the Deputy Commissioner on 01st of June, 2022 on the basis of aforementioned Land Dispute Settlement Page No.# 12/12 Report as well as partial modification of land dispute settlement dated 23.02.2022 is also liable to be set aside for the same reasons which this Court accordingly does. 21. Since, the dispute between the parties is of civil nature and since there are Rules governing the procedures to be followed while settling such dispute, the parties including the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for seeking redressal of their dispute before appropriate forum under appropriate provisions of law. 22. This civil revision petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant