Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040001892023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : CRP/9/2023 Tanya Alias Hennya Gibi S/o Late Mihen Gibi, Permanent Resident of Village Tata Mori, PO/PS Gensi, Lower Siang District, AP 2: Henni Gibi Age: Occupation : S/o Late Mihen Gibi Permanent Resident of Village Tata Mori PO/PS Gensi Lower Siang District AP 3: Hemmi Gibi Age: Occupation : S/o Late Mihen Gibi Permanent Resident of Village Tata Mori PO/PS Gensi Lower Siang District A VERSUS Henjum Richi alias Henjum Richi S/o Late Mihen Gibi, Permanent Resident of Village Tata Mori, PO/PS Gensi, Lower Siang District, A.P Advocate for the Petitioner : Dugmar Kamduk, K Eshi,P Tashi,Mipe Ete Advocate for the Respondent : N Rama, P Tatam,N Kanu,N Kuma,T Rahul,P L Gee Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 03-02-2025 Heard Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N. Rama, learned counsel for the sole respondent. 2. The challenge made in this revision petition is to the Bango Level Keba decision dated 20.01.2023 passed by the village authorities comprising of different villages of Gensi and Sibe Circle on the ground that parties being resident of Tata Mori village, a larger forum like Circle does not have the jurisdiction under law. 3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners and the respondent are brothers and the respondent is the eldest amongst them and they are the residents of Tata Mori village under Gensi Circle, Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh and belong to Gibi clan. It is contended that the respondent, although eldest brother, without knowing the history and facts of their origin has declared himself that he do not belong to Gibi clan rather belong to Richi clan. 4. The petitioners filed a complaint before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Gensi pursuant to which, an order was issued to conduct a Bango Level Keba, wherein Head Gaon Burahs, Gaon Burahs and Political Interpreters of Gensi and Sibe Circle were appointed. Page No.# 3/5 5. Pursuant thereto, the Head Gaon Burahs, Gaon Burahs and Political Interpreters had conducted the Circle/Bango Level Keba in the Circle level whereby the sole respondent, namely, Henjum Gibi@Tajum Gibi has been declared to be from Richi clan. 6. Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Head Gaon Burahs, Gaon Burahs and Political Interpreters of the Gensi Circle has no jurisdiction and authority to conduct the Bango Level Keba as the parties i.e. the petitioners and the respondent being natural brothers are residents of Tata Mori village where the Gaon Burahs are appointed for that village and authorised to take up the disputes of the village. Therefore, he submits that the Head Gaon Burahs, Gaon Burahs and Political Interpreters of the Gensi Circle do not have the authority to decide the dispute between the petitioners and the respondent who are the residents of Tata Mori village under the jurisdiction of the village authority of Tata Mori. He further submits that Circle Keba is not recognised under the law therefore, the decision is nullity and as such, he prays that the matter may be remanded back to the village authority of Tata Mori village to decide the dispute. 7. Mr. N. Rama, learned counsel for the respondent, fairly submits that under the law, there is no recognition of the Circle Level Keba rather the village authorities are appointed in the respective village where the disputes are to be resolved by such village authorities of the particular village. Therefore, he submits that the matter may be remanded back to the village authority of Tata Mori village to decide the dispute. Page No.# 4/5 8. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 9. Undisputably, the Circle/Bango Level Keba is not recognised authority under law. Although, as a matter of practice, village authorities can be constituted to decide a particular dispute, if the parties are of different village for better administration of dispute resolution, however, it would not be permitted to the village authorities of the different village to take up the dispute when there are village authorities appointed for a particular village. 10. On perusal of Bango/Circle Level Keba decision dated 20.01.2023, it reflects that impugned decision has been rendered by the village authorities of different villages pursuant to the constitution of Circle/Bango Level Keba by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Gensi. Since the village authorities have been appointed for the Tata Mori village, the village authorities, much less, the Political Interpreters of the Gensi and Sibe Circle consisting of different villages would not have any jurisdiction to decide the dispute. Under the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945, the village authorities are appointed under Regulation 5 for a particular village by the Deputy Commissioner. Thus, the dispute would fall within the jurisdiction of village authority of Tata Mori village and not under the jurisdiction of the Gensi and Sibe Circle/Bango. 11. Having considered that the impugned Circle/Bango Level Keba decision dated 20.01.2023 having been passed without jurisdiction, by the village authorities of different villages under Gensi and Sibe Circle including the Political Interpreters, I am of the considered view that the Page No.# 5/5 said impugned Circle/Bango Level Keba decision dated 20.01.2023, is not sustainable under the law. Accordingly, the same is set aside and quashed. 12. Parties may approach the village authority/Gaon Burahs of the Tata Mori village for resolution of their disputes as the petitioners and the respondent are brothers and permanent residents of Tata Mori village. 13. The civil revision petition stand allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant