Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14435 (GAU)

Sh. Laltluangpuia and 38 Ors. v. Union of India and 6 Ors.

I.A.(Civil)/171/2026 · 2026-09-15

Kalyan Rai Surana, Rajesh Mazumdar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC030006922026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/171/2026 Sh. Laltluangpuia and 38 Ors. S/o Laibuanga Khankawn Village P. O. Champhai Pin 796321 2: Sh. S. Lalthlamuana S/o Ronghaka Khankawn Village P. O. Champhai Pin 796321 3: Smt. Zamani W/o Kaplinga (L) Khankawn Village P. O. Champhai Pin 796321 4: Sh. Laibuanga S/o Kaplinga (L) Khankawn Village P. O. Champhai Pin 796321 5: Sh. Rotluanga S/o Awithangpa (L) Khankawn VIllage P. O. Champhai Pin 796321 VERSUS Union of India and 6 Ors. Through the Secretary Page No.# 2/3 Ministry of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi Pin 110001 2:The Commander GREF Project Pushpak HQ C/o 99 APO Pin 9317xx Aizawl Mizoram 3:The Officer Commanding 74 RCC (GREF) Zotlang Champhai Mizoram Pin 796321 4:The State of Mizoram Through the Secretary Land Revenue and Settlement Department Aizawl Pin 796001 5:The Deputy Commissioner/District Collector Champhai District Mizoram Pin 796321 Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Mangsuanhau Advocate for the Respondent : BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 16.09.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. Joseph Mangsuanhau, learned counsel for the applicants. Also Page No.# 3/3 heard Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC, representing respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State, representing respondent no.4. 2. By filing this interlocutory application, the applicants, who are the appellants in the connected WA No. 8 of 2026, have prayed for replacing of page no.4 of synopsis and page nos. 7 and 8 of the memo of appeal and to read documents as per index at sl. No. 6 and 7 and annexures at page nos. 220, 221 and 222. 3. The prayer made in this interlocutory application is allowed. 4. A separate order has been passed in connected I.A.(C) 175/2026. 5. The applicants have liberty to make the necessary amendments in the connected memo of appeal. 6. Accordingly, this interlocutory application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant