JUDGMENT & ORDER : MARLI VANKUNG, J. Heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Valentina Laldinpuii, learned counsel for the private respondent No. 4 and Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte. 2 . The instant writ petition is preferred against the Order dated 17.06.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 112/2024, wherein, this court had dismissed the Writ Petition No. 112/2024, with an observation that it is not appropriate to considered the same matter by way of a fresh writ petition since the said matters in the instant writ petition are being considered and dealt with in Contempt Case (C) No. 8/2022 which arises out of WP(C) No.148/2019 dated 19.03.2020. 3 . Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the petition submits that this Court vide its Order dated 17.06.2025, in Contempt Case No (C) No. 8/2022, had give the liberty to the petitioner to file a Review Petition against the Order of this Court in WP(C) No. 148/2019 dated 19.03.2022. Accordingly, the petitioner had filed a review petition against the Order dated 13.02.20220 in WP(C) No. 148/2019 before the concerned Single Judge, which was registered as Review Petition No. 257/2025. The learned Single Judge in its Order dated 13.11.2025 had dismissed of the said Review Petition by observing that “the directions passed by this Court in the impugned Order dated 19.03.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 148/2019 has already complied with, there is nothing to be reviewed. If the Review Petitioner is not happy with the verification report and the contents therein, the same should be put to challenge by way of an appropriate petition before an appropriate forum. If the challenge failed, there is no barred for the Review Petitioner to approach the higher forum with his grievances. However, as no grounds has been made out and the Review Petition stands dismissed.” 4 . The learned counsel submits that since the Writ Petition No. 112/2024 is not against the Order dated 19.03.2020 passed by the co- ordinate bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 148/2019, wherein, this Court had directed to constituted a Verification Team to verify the lands of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent No. 4 herein. He submitted that the issued by the under Secretary to the Govt. He submitted that the issued by the under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, Land Revenue & Settlement Department dated 13.01.2022, the joint verification report dated 15.09.2021, the letter of assessment issued by the Settlement Officer, Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Kolasib District dated 23.09.2021 as well as the subsequent assessment made by the District Collector, Kolasib District. He submitted that the verification and the assessment was not done as per the Order dated 19.03.2020 passed in WP(C) No. 148/2019. 5 . The learned counsel submits that since the co-ordinate Court of this bench while dismissing the Review Petition 257/2025 dated 13.11.2025, had held that ”if the Review Petitioner is not happy with the verification report and the contents therein, the same should be put to challenge by way of an appropriate petition before an appropriate forum’’, he submitted that the WP(C) No. 112/2024 which was dismissed vide Order dated 17.02.2025 is liable to be reviewed and be restored since the WP(C) No. 112/2024 is regarding the setting aside of the verification report and the contents therein, which is not accordance with the Order dated 19.03.2020 passed in WP(C) 148/2019. 6 . Per contra, Ms. Valentina Laldinpuii, learned counsel for the private respondent No. 4 submits that there were no grounds for review of this Court’s Order dated 17.06.2025 in WP(C) No. 112/2025 since the subject matter which is regarding the compensation to be paid by the present petitioner on the acquisition of his landed property covered by Periodic Passes No. 501801/10/58 of 2005 and 501801/10/59 of 2005 was already dealt with by the Co-ordinate bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 148/2019 dated 19.03.2020. The learned counsel submitted that the present Review Petitioner had not objected to having the Joint Verification over the landed properties covered by the Periodic Passes. She submitted that in terms of the Court’s Order dated 19.03.2020 a verification team was duly constituted and the verification of the landed property of the petitioner was duly held and a joint verification report dated 15.09.2021, 13.01.2022 and the letter of assessment issued by the Settlement Officer, Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Kolasib District dated 23.09.2029 was issued in terms of the Order dated 19.03.2020 passes in WPC No. 148/2019. However, since the petitioners have failed to pay the compensation amount due to the petitioners, the connected Contempt Case (C) No. 8/2022 was filed, which is still pending before this court. The learned counsel for the private respondent submit that the Review petitions are simple playing delay tactics to avoid the payment of the compensation amount to the private respondents and that there are no grounds for reviewing the dismissal order in WP(C) No. 112/2024 dated 17.06.2025, since the matter regarding the payment of compensation to the private respondent has already been settle by a Co-ordinate bench of this court in WP(C) No. 148/2019 dated 19.03.2020 and hence, the same matter cannot be agitated again by filing the WP(C) No. 112/2024, which was rightly dismissed by this court vide Order dated 17.06.2025. 7. This court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and also has perused the documents on record. It is seen that the Co-ordinate bench of this court in its order dated 19.03.2020 in WP(C) 148/2019 had heard and considered the prayer payment of compensation for the damaged caused to the petitioner’s (the respondent No. 4 herein) lands which was caused due to the construction of an approached road by the respondent (the petitioner herein) wherein, the learned counsel for the Petitioner (the respondent No. 4 herein), had prayed for constitution of the Joint Verification Team. The said WP(C) No. 148/2019 was disposed of accordingly, since learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 (review petitioner herein) had submitted that he has no objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner (private respondent No. 4 herein), for the constitution of a joint verification team to verify whether the land of the petitioner (private respondent No. 4 herein) had been damaged and thereby verify whether the concerned authorities should acquire the land of the petitioner (the private respondent No. 4 herein) of required to be used by the said authorities (review petitioners herein). It also appears that, in compliance with the said Judgment & Order dated 19.03.2020 the joint verification team had made a joint verification report dated 16.09.2021, and the Settlement Officer, Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Kolasib made assessment report dated 23.09.2021. 8. It also appears that, in compliance with the said Judgment & Order dated 19.03.2020 the joint verification team had made a joint verification report dated 16.09.2021, and the Settlement Officer, Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Kolasib made assessment report dated 23.09.2021. 8. However, the Review Petitioner being unhappy with the verification report made by Joint verification team, had filed WP(C) 112/2024 which was duly dismissed vide Order dated 17.06.2025 on finding that, the matter challenging the said Order’s dated 13.01.2022, 15.09.2021 and 23.09.2021 are also issue dealt in Contempt Case (C) No. 8/2022 which was filed by the private respondent for non-compliance of the Order of this Court in WP(C) No. 148/2019 dated 19.03.2020. This Court, however, finds that since a Co-ordinate bench of this Court in a subsequent order, in Review Petition No. 257/2025 dated 13.11.2025, had given liberty to the petitioner to put to challenge by way of an appropriate petition, if the review petitioner is not happy with the verification report, this court finds that it would be appropriate to interfere with its order dated 17.06.2025 and revive the WP(C) No. 112/2024, which was filed by the petitioner (review petitioner herein) being unhappy with the joint verification report and Order’s dated 15.09.2021, 23.09.2021 and 13.01.2022. 9. Accordingly, the Review Petition stands allowed and WP(C) No. 112/2024 is revived, in view of the order of the Co-ordinate bench of this court dated 13.11.2025 in Review Petition 257/2025, which is a subsequent development/order passed, it is, however, seen that Contempt Case (C) No. 8/2022 is also filed for a non-compliance of the said Orders dated 15.09.2021, 23.09.2021 and 13.01.2022, and therefore it would be appropriate if the revived WP(C) No. 112/2024 is listed along with the said Contempt Case (C) No. 8/2022. 10. List the matter again after 2 (two) weeks.