Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040013482024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/450/2024 Tashi Pujen Son of Late Tabin Pujen, resident of Yorkodom Village, PO and PS Monigong, Shi Yomi District, Arunachal Pradesh 791003 VERSUS The State of AP and 3 Ors represented by the Secretary, District Administration / General Administration, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Tato Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 791003 3:The Additional Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Monigong Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh 791003 4:Taying Kame Age: 0 Occupation : resident of Lungte Village PO Pidi PS Monigong Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 79100 Advocate for the Petitioner : Binter Picha, Tao Tarin,Jumgam Jini Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), -BEFORE- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER (ORAL) 22.05.2025 Heard Shri B. Picha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri Y. Riram, learned State Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 2. Considering the subject matter and also the development which has taken place in the meantime, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage, itself. 3. As per the facts projected, the private respondent had lodged a complaint before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shi Yomi District, Monigong against the Saji Clan with regard to encroachment of certain areas and on receipt of the said complaint, the Additional Deputy Commissioner had passed the impugned order dated 13.09.2024 directing conduction of a Kebang on 25.09.2024 by which the Kebang Committee was also constituted. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the Additional Deputy Commissioner did not have the jurisdiction or authority even to take cognizance of any complaint and to constitute the Kebang. Accordingly, this writ petition was instituted. 5. While issuing notice by this Court in the instant writ petition on 03.10.2024, it was observed that any decision taken by the Kebang would be subject to the outcome of this writ petition. Page No.# 3/3 6. Shri Picha, the learned counsel for the petitioner has apprised this Court that the matter was not proceeded with by the Kebang. He has informed this Court that subsequently an order has been passed on 19.11.2024 whereby the decision dated 13.09.2024 of constitution of the Kebang has been cancelled. He has also placed on record the copy of the order dated 19.11.2024. 7. Shri Y. Riram, learned State Counsel has submitted that he does not have specific instruction on the aforesaid development. However, he submits that if such an order has been passed, it may be taken into consideration and appropriate order may be passed in the writ petition. 8. After hearing the parties and on perusal of the order dated 19.11.2024 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of the concerned District whereby a Kebang Committee formed on 13.09.2024 has been cancelled, this Court is of the view that grievance of the petitioner has been substantially redressed. Accordingly, this writ petition is not required to be proceeded any further and the same is closed. Copy of the order dated 19.11.2024 placed before this Court by Shri Picha, learned counsel for the petitioner is made as a part of the record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant