Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040008852024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/105/2024 The Union of India and 3 Ors through the Director General, ITBP, MHA, govt of India, Block-2, CCGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 2: The Inspector General Age: Occupation : North East Frontier HQ ITBP MHA Govt of India Khatting Hill Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh 791111 3: The DIG SHQ TEZPUR Age: Occupation : ITBP MHA Govt of India Rangamati Post Bihalguri Sontipur District Assam 784153 4: The Commandant Age: Occupation : 54th ITBP Nigam Gram Bhalukpong Sonitpur District Assam 78410 Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS Kampu Dolo alias Kompu Dolo and 3 Ors Son of Late Tagung Dolo, Permanent Resident of Village Rebe, PO/PS Chayangtajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.2:The State of Arunachal Pradesh Age: 0 Occupation : through the Chief Secretary Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Civil Secretariat Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh 3:The Secretary Land Management Age: 0 Occupation : Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar 4:The Deputy Commissioner / Land Acquisition Authority Age: 0 Occupation : East Kameng District Seppa Arunachal Prades Advocate for the Petitioner : Marto Kato, DSGI Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Eho Menjo,Minter Karbak,Pritam Taffo BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 29-04-2025 (M.R.Pathak, J) Heard Mr. Marto Kato, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the applicant and Mr. P. Taffo, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Pangu learned Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4. 2. Land of the respondent No.1 was taken over under the Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Page No.# 3/4 Tract Jhum Land Regulation, 1947 for construction of Border Outpost of ITBPF at village - Rebe, Chayangtajo, East Kameng District along Indo-China Border in Arunachal Pradesh. However, as the Land Management Department of the State while determining the land compensation, did not assess 100% solatium and 12% interest as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act, in short), he preferred a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 56/2023. 3. Following the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mihim Laling Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and 7 others, decided on 25.04.2022 in WA No. 15/2022 arising out of WP(C) No. 280(AP)/2020, the learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated 13.06.2023 passed in said WP(C) No. 56/2023 directed the Deputy Commissioner, East Siang District to grant solatium and interest upon the compensation already determined, payable to the respondent No.1/writ petitioner for taking over his land for establishing the Border Outpost of ITBPF. 4. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 13.06.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 56/2023, the applicants as appellants have preferred the connected writ appeal with a delay of 371 days. 5. Hence, this application by the applicants/appellants for condonation of delay of said 371 days in preferring the connected writ appeal. 6. The respondent No.1 has filed an affidavit objecting to such condonation of delay, stating that the applicants did not give the exact dates as to when they considered to prefer the connected appeal. 7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the materials placed in this application, we found that the applicants/appellants could give sufficient reasons for the delay in preferring the connected appeal. 8. Considering the entire aspect of the matter, the delay of 371 days in preferring the connected writ appeal by the applicants against the judgment and order dated 13.06.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 56/2023, preferred by the respondent No.1 is hereby condoned. Page No.# 4/4 9. Registry shall accordingly register and number the writ appeal and shall list the same for admission on 05.05.2025. 10. With the above observations and directions, this Interlocutory Applications stands disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant