JUDGMENT : Devashis Baruah, J. Heard Mr. I. Iralu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. E. Thiba Phom, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2. The Petitioner herein has assailed the order dated 18.07.2023 insofar as Paragraph No.9 is concerned and further sought for setting aside the Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023. 3. It is the very case of the Petitioner that the order dated 18.07.2023 and more particularly, the observations made in Paragraph No.9 is without any authority and jurisdiction taking into account that the Petitioner had filed an appeal against the Eviction Notice dated 15.03.2023 and the jurisdiction of the Appellate Authority was to consider as to whether the said notice was tenable or not. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Appellate Authority while holding that the Eviction Notice dated 15.03.2023 which was the subject matter of challenge in the said appeal was not tenable could not have made the observations at Paragraph No.9 of the said order dated 18.07.2023. 5. It is also taken note of that the Petitioner herein has assailed the Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023. The ground on which the Petitioner has assailed the said notice is on the question that the provisions of Nagaland Eviction of Persons in Unauthorized Occupation of Public Land Act, 1971 (for short, “the Act of 1971”) could not have been at all applied to the facts of the case as summary proceedings can only be initiated in a case where there is a clear title on the part of the Government. The learned counsel referring to the decree passed in favour of the Petitioner's predecessor in Civil Suit No. 02/2007 submitted that there was a declaration of title in respect to the said land in favour of the predecessor of the Petitioner and therefore, till such decree remains, the Respondents herein could not have exercised the powers of summary eviction in terms with the Act of 1971. 6. This Court duly takes note of that the instant proceedings was filed on 14.12.2023 and this Court passed an order on 15.12.2023 staying the said show cause notice dated 26.07.2023. 6. This Court duly takes note of that the instant proceedings was filed on 14.12.2023 and this Court passed an order on 15.12.2023 staying the said show cause notice dated 26.07.2023. However, from a perusal of the additional affidavit filed by the Respondents, it is seen that not only a reply was submitted in pursuance of the said Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023 but an order was also passed on 22.08.2023, and subsequently an Eviction Order was passed on 12.10.2023. In other words, the show cause proceedings which has been assailed in the instant proceedings has already been acted upon even prior to the filing of the instant writ petition. 7. This Court has given an anxious consideration to the respective submissions made on behalf of the parties. 8. The challenge made in the present proceedings relates to Paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 18.07.2023 as well as a Show Cause Notice issued on 26.07.2023. Let this Court first deal with the challenge made to Paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 18.07.2023. 9. The Petitioner in the previous round of proceedings had challenged the Notice of Eviction dated 15.03.2023 before the Appellate Authority under Section 12 of the Act of 1971. The jurisdiction vested upon the Appellate Authority was only to adjudicate as to whether the notice impugned therein, i.e. the Eviction Notice dated 15.03.2023, was in accordance with law or not. 10. This Court duly takes note of the order dated 18.07.2023 and a perusal thereof reveals that the learned Appellate Authority had held that the Eviction Notice dated 15.03.2023 had procedural defects and accordingly set aside the same. The learned Appellate Authority ought to have concluded the said adjudication on the basis thereof. However, the learned Appellate Authority went to the extent of declaring the said land to be a public land, which was not the subject matter of the said Appeal. The said observations were made at Paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 18.07.2023. 11. Considering the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the observation at Paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 18.07.2023 was unwarranted and is required to be interfered with. 12. Now let this Court take note of the Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023. 13. 11. Considering the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the observation at Paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 18.07.2023 was unwarranted and is required to be interfered with. 12. Now let this Court take note of the Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023. 13. It is pertinent to take note of that the said Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023 is based upon the order dated 18.07.2023 whereby the earlier Eviction Notice dated 15.03.2023 was set aside, thereby granting liberty to the authority concerned to issue a fresh notice. 14. It is the opinion of this Court that the said Show Cause Notice being a notice asking the Petitioner to state its defence, the Petitioner ought to have filed the reply to the said Show Cause Notice. 15. Let this Court now take note of Annexure-B1 to the additional affidavit filed by the State Respondents wherein it is seen that the Petitioner has submitted a reply and in pursuance thereto, an order was passed on 22.08.2023 rejecting the reply and directing eviction be carried out. It is also seen from Annexure-B2 that an Eviction Order was passed on 12.10.2023. However, the order dated 22.08.2023 as well as the Eviction Order dated 12.10.2023 have not been put to challenge. 16. This Court further takes note of that the learned Appellate Authority under Section 12 of the Act of 1971 is an authority which can adjudicate on various factual adjudications including the aspect whether the land in question which the Petitioner is in occupation is a Government land or not. 17. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The observation at Paragraph No. 9 of the impugned order dated 18.07.2023 is set aside and quashed. (ii) This Court is also of the opinion that taking into account that the Show Cause Notice dated 26.07.2023 has already been given effect to and the orders dated 22.08.2023 and 12.10.2023 has been already passed, the question of interfering with the Show Cause Notice now at this stage does not arise. (iii) Mr. L. Iralu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was not aware of the order dated 22.08.2023 as well as the order dated 12.10.2023 and it only came to the notice of the Petitioner after the additional affidavit was filed. (iii) Mr. L. Iralu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was not aware of the order dated 22.08.2023 as well as the order dated 12.10.2023 and it only came to the notice of the Petitioner after the additional affidavit was filed. The learned counsel further submitted that as the instant proceedings is pending and no action has been taken, the Petitioner was under the impression that this Court would have the jurisdiction to set aside the entire proceedings including the orders dated 22.08.2023 and 12.10.2023. Taking into account the above, as the Petitioner herein was diligently litigating under a bona fide impression in the instant proceedings to the effect that the Petitioner could get the relief in respect to the order dated 22.08.2023 as well as the Eviction Order dated 12.10.2023, the Petitioner herein should be given an opportunity to assail both the orders before the learned Appellate Authority under Section 12 of the Act of 1971. (iv) Taking into account that there is an appellate forum wherein the Petitioner can agitate and challenge the order dated 22.08.2023 as well as the Eviction Order dated 12.10.2023, this Court grants the Petitioner 10 (ten) days' time from today for filing an appeal under Section 12 of the Act of 1971. (v) It is observed that if the appeal is filed on or before 02.04.2026, the learned Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal on merits without insisting on the question of limitation. (vi) This Court further observes and directs that the learned Appellate Authority shall decide the said appeal on merits without being influenced by Paragraph No.9 of the impugned order dated 18.07.2023 as well as the observations made in the present proceedings on merits. (vii) There shall be no order as to costs.