Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040009122023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/43/2025 Lobsang Tsering Age: 54 Occupation : Address:Son of Shri Sang Phuntso presently serving as Commissioner (Tax and Excise) Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar. VERSUS Migom H Borang Kepang Age: 0 Occupation : Address:Son of Shri K. A Borang a resident of Nongkhon PO and PS Mahadevpur District Namsai Arunachal Pradesh. a Permanent Resident of Silluk Village PO and PS Mebo District East Siang Arunachal Pradesh. ------------ Advocate for : Nabam Kakum Advocate for : Dakjum Riba appearing for Migom H Borang Kepang: Advocate appearing for respectively. Linked Case : Cont.Cas(C)/22/2023 Migom H Borang Kepang Page No.# 2/4 S/o Shri K. A Borang, a Resident of Nongkhon, PO/PS Mahadevpur, District Namsai, Arunachal Pradesh. a Permanent Resident of Siluk Village, PO/PS Mebo, District East Siang, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS Lobsang Tsering Commissioner (Tax and Excise), Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. Advocate for the Petitioner : Muk Pertin, Senior Advocate, Tallo Talang,Dakjum Riba,Tshering Yangzom Bhutia,Rimo Riba,Mukbom Pertin,Karyom Dabi Advocate for the Respondent : Abhai Kumar Singh, Tsering Nyima,Nabam Kakum,Takar Bagang BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 12.02.2025 Heard Mr. M. Pertin, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. R. Riba, learned counsel appearing for the contempt petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent/contemnor. 2. The Contempt Case has been filed by the writ petitioner in WP(C)No. 172/ (AP)2022, alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)No. 172/(AP)2022, directing the sole respondent/contemnor to take a final decision on the letter dated 06.01.2021, written to him as regards grant of Retail Outlet IMPL/Beer Wine Shop licence at Mahadevpur, Namsai to the writ petitioner, within a period of 20 (twenty) days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. 3. According to the petitioner’s counsel, despite receipt of the Court’s order, Page No.# 3/4 the respondent/contemnor has not taken any effective steps for compliance of the Court Order. That apart, it has also been alleged that the steps required to be taken within 20 (twenty) days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the Court Order, were also not taken by the respondent. Hence, he is guilty of having committed Contempt of this Court. 4. Taking note of the submission of the petitioner’s counsel, the learned Single Judge had passed order dated 28.01.2025, inter alia directing personal appearance of the respondent/contemnor, fixing 12.02.2025 as the next date in the Contempt Case. 5. Yesterday i.e. on 11.02.2025, the respondent/contemnor, namely, Shri Lobsang Tsering had moved an Interlocutory Application, being, IA(C)No. 43/ (AP)2025, arising out of the Contempt Case (C) No. 22(AP)2023, seeking an order for exemption of his personal appearance. Taking note of the grievance expressed in the Interlocutory Application, this Court had passed order dated 11.02.2025, permitting the applicant/contemnor to remain virtually present through online mode when the matter is taken, by dispensing with his physical appearance. 6. Shri Lobsang Tsering, the respondent/contemnor, addressing the Court through Virtual Mode (VC), has submitted that the Commissioner of Tax & Excise, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, does not have any power to grant licence of this nature, as the said power under the Rules is retained by the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh. 7. If that be so, it is apparent that prima facie there is no wilful disobedience Page No.# 4/4 of the Court’s order by the respondent. Moreover, it appears that on 12.12.2024, the respondent had also passed a reasoned order, after examining the application of the contempt petitioner, forwarding the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner, Namsai and the said application is pending before the Government, till today. 8. Under such circumstances, I am unable to agree with the submission of Mr. Pertin, learned Senior Counsel, that the present is a case of wilful disobedience of the order passed by the Court. For the aforesaid reason, the order of personal appearance passed on 28.01.2025, in respect of the respondent/contemnor is hereby recalled. Consequently, the respondent will not be required to remain personally present in connection with this case on the next date. 9. The Contempt Case be listed for hearing in the month of March, 2025. 10. The parties may exchange additional pleadings, in the meantime, if so advised. 11. It is made clear that the observations made, hereinabove, are prima facie in nature and shall not have any bearing in the outcome of the Contempt Case at the stage of final hearing. 12. The Interlocutory Application stands allowed to the extent, indicated, hereinabove. JUDGE Comparing Assistant