Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040018872024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/268/2024 Tadang Tamut and 12 Ors Son of Shri Talom Tamut, Village Jomlo Mongku, PO Pessing, PS Rumgong, Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Tarung Nyising Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Taka Nyising Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Tabom Talom Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Takir Talom Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Tabir Mize Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Taker Mize Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Takar Darung Page No.# 2/6 Age: Occupation : Son of Tama Darung Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: Laki Mibang Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tamer Mibang Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Tare Talom Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tarung Talom Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Tabang Yosung Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tanyong Yosung Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 9: Samuel Ketan Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tator Ketan Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 3/6 10: Tapun Gao Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tangir Gao Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 11: Tapang Tali Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Taja Tali Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 12: Tagam Ketan Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Tabuk Ketan Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 13: Tanyi Tali Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Takut Tali Village Jomlo Mongku PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS Kaling Saro and 7 Ors Son of Late Tanon Saro, permanent resident of Village Jomlo Mongku, PO and PS Rumgong, Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The State of Arunachal Pradesh Age: 0 Occupation : Page No.# 4/6 represented through the Chief Secretary Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 3:The Secretary Land Management Age: 0 Occupation : Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 4:The Secretary Age: 0 Occupation : Health and Family Welfare Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 5:The Director Health and Family Welfare Age: 0 Occupation : Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Naharlagun. 6:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Siang District Pangin Arunachal Pradesh. 7:The District Medical Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Siang District Pangin Govt of Arunachal Pradesh. 8:The Circle Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Jomlo Monbuk Siang District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Doba Tamut, Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Karmu Chotton,K Gao,Nani Kuru,Honi Tana Tara,Oken Duggong,Nikita Danggen,SC (Land Management),SC(Health),Dugmar Kamduk,Taba Tagum Page No.# 5/6 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG O RD E R 18.09.2025 (N. Sailo, J) Heard Mr. L. Perme, learned counsel for the applicants, who submits that by filing this interlocutory application, the applicants seek condonation of 76 days delay in filing the connected writ appeal against the judgment and order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.53(AP)/2018. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants were not a party in the writ proceedings and the connected appeal has been filed by them by way of a third party appeal. This Court has also granted leave to the applicants for filing the writ appeal, but for the delay, the writ appeal has not been considered. [2] Referring to the statements made in the application, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that it was only on 15.11.2024 that the applicants came to know about passing of the judgment dated 05.09.2024. Immediately upon coming to learn about the same, the applicants took steps to engage a counsel and for obtaining a certified copy of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which was made available to them on 18.11.2025. Thereafter the finalization of the writ appeal took about three weeks’ time and hence the delay of 76 days have occasioned. [3] Ms. N. Danggen, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submits Page No.# 6/6 that she has no objection if the delay is condoned and that the matter may be heard on merit. Similar submission has been made by Ms. P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents. [4] Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the statements made in the application, we deem it proper to condone the delay of 76 days in filing the connected writ appeal. [5] It is ordered accordingly. [6] Interlocutory application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant