Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040012302026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WA/45/2026 Nabam Komal Son of Late Nabam Tagung, permanent resident of Village Rupung, Sangdupota Circle, PO and PS Balijan, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Upper Niti Vihar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and 3 Ors represented by the Secretary, General Administration, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Itanagar Capital Complex Arunachal Pradesh. 3:The Executive Engineer (UD) Age: 0 Occupation : Department of Urban Affairs Itanagar Division Itanagar. 4:The Assistant Commissioner cum Estate Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Itanagar Capital Complex Itanagar Advocate for the Petitioner : Parswajyoti Das Nair, Sr. Adv, Thomas Jamoh,Goyi Taba Raju,Tukrin Ligu,Tanur Gao,Amy Talom,Adam Tatak Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 06-08-2026 (N.U.K. Nair J.) Heard Mr. P. D. Nair, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Tatak, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents. 2. Mr. Nair, learned Senior Counsel, after taking us through the facts leading to the institution of WP(C)/346/2026, submits that the appellant has already preferred an appeal against the order dated 18.06.2026 passed by the Estate Officer before the appellate authority. 3. On the last date of listing, this Court had required Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, to obtain instructions regarding the stage at which the said appeal is presently pending. 4. Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, on instructions, submits that the appellate authority has fixed the appeal for hearing on 17.08.2026. 5. In view of the fact that the said appeal has now been fixed for final hearing on 17.08.2026, we are of the considered view that, since the appellant has already availed of the statutory remedy available under the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Un-authorized Occupants) Act, 2003, he is now required to pursue the said remedy. Page No.# 3/3 6. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the writ appeal is closed, requiring the appellant to pursue the said appeal presently pending before the Deputy Commissioner, Capital Complex, Itanagar. 7. It is provided that the appellate authority shall consider and dispose of the said appeal expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant