Page No.# 1/8 GAHC040015872024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/541/2024 Pammi Medo and 21 Ors Son of Shri Chujeng Medo, Village Migging, PO and PS Tuting, Upper Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Tapet Duggong Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Ogon Duggong Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Linggong Ninggo Age: Occupation : Son of Late Baling Ninggo Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Anung Medo Age: Occupation : Son of Late Mopun Medo Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Kitin Ninggo Age: Page No.# 2/8 Occupation : Son of Shri Linggong Ninggo Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: Smti Yari Tali Age: Occupation : Wife of Shri Senggong Tali Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Senggong Tali Age: Occupation : Son of Late Midi Tali Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Apang Lonchung Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Digong Lonchung Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 9: Smti Yone Lonchung Age: Occupation : Wife of Late Channang Lonchung Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 10: Tutu Panyi Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Yajong Panyi Village Panggo Page No.# 3/8 PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 11: Gesi Lonchung Age: Occupation : Son of Late Chemin Lonchung Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 12: Kaling Pasi Age: Occupation : Son of Late Kakit Pasi Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 13: Tomong Tedo Age: Occupation : Son of Mikkit Tedo Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 14: Galling Tedo Age: Occupation : Son of Late Lantong Tedo Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 15: Tapet Mibang Age: Occupation : Son of Late Ati Mibang Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 4/8 16: Lisong Medo Age: Occupation : Son of Tabang Medo Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 17: Smti Takir Tangu Age: Occupation : Daughter of Shri Barang Tali Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 18: Smti Yine Lonchung Age: Occupation : Daughter of Shri Gaging Panyi PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 19: Smti Api Tali Age: Occupation : Wife of Shri Ajay Tali Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 20: Miss Dine Medo Age: Occupation : Daughter of Late Babang Tali Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 21: Opang Lonchung Age: Occupation : Page No.# 5/8 Son of Late Channang Lonchnung Village Migging PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 22: Obang Medo Age: Occupation : Son of Late Dojeng Medo Village Panggo PO and PS Tuting Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP and 4 Ors represented by the Chief Secretary cum Chief Vigilance Officer, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:The Secretary Land Management Age: 0 Occupation : Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 3:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Yingkiong Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Additional Deputy Commissioner cum Chairman Land Compensation Assessment Board Age: 0 Occupation : Migging Tuting BRO Road (0Km 19.834 Kms) 5:The District Land Revenue and Settlement Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Tabit Tapak, Y Pangu,Aso Dalbong Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Page No.# 6/8 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 26.05.2025 Heard Mr. T. Tapak, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh for the State respondents. 2. The grievance, being sought to be addressed by invoking the extra- ordinary jurisdiction of this court, in this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by 23 petitioners, is that they are project affected families of Migging-Tuting BRO Road from 0 km – 19.834 kms. Their lands were acquired for construction of Migging-Tuting BRO Road and the Land Compensation Assessment Board, led by Additional Deputy Commissioner, Tuting, had prepared the assessment report, in which the genuine project affected families were deliberately left out and that they lodged repeated complaint and also filed various representation before the concerned authorities, but, their representation for re-assessment and re-verification of land and property, failed to evoke any response. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this court by filing the present petition for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to prepare fresh report of the land and properties of the petitioners in a transparent and fair manner. 3. Mr. Tapak, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the basis of the grievance of the petitioners lies in the order dated 27.09.2023, passed by the District Land Revenue and Settlement Officer, Yingkiong, Upper Siang, which is enclosed with the petition as Annexure No. 5, at page No. 37 of the petition, Page No.# 7/8 wherein direction was issued for joint re-survey/assessment work of genuine and left out cases of Migging-Tuting BRO Road, which is to be started w.e.f. 29.09.2023. But, this time also the petitioners could not participate in the process as it was carried out without proper notice. Mr. Tapak further submits that the petitioners have preferred one representation, before the Deputy Commissioner, Yingkiong, Upper Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, on 16.08.2023. But, the said representation is yet to be disposed of and under such circumstances, Mr. Tapak submits that this writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation dated 16.08.2023, filed by the present petitioners which is enclosed with the petition as Annexure No. 4, at page No. 32. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Nabam, learned Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh for the State respondents submits that the petitioner were left out while the assessment of the project affected families was carried out and that he has no objection in the event of closing this writ petition by directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioners on 16.08.2023. 5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the petitioners, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the representation filed by the petitioners on 16.08.2023 and also the order dated 27.09.2023. 6. It appears that having been left out, the petitioners had filed one representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Yingkiong, the respondent No. 3 and the same is yet to be dispose of by him. Page No.# 8/8 7. Thus, taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and also taking note of the facts and circumstances on the record and as agreed upon, this court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition by directing the respondent authorities, especially the respondent No. 3, the Deputy Commissioner, Yingkiong, Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioners on 16.08.2023, by a reasoned order, after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. 8. The aforesaid exercise has to be carried out within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petitioners shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent authorities, especially the respondent No. 3, the Deputy Commissioner, Yingkiong, Upper Siang district, within a week from today. 9. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of. The parties have to bear their own costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant