Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040000892026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : CRP/2/2026 Anyup Takoh Son of Shri Tapor Tako, permanent resident of Mangnang Village, Po and PS Sille Oyan, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS Obang Jerang and 4 Ors Son of Shri Taben Jerang, permanent resident of Mangnang Village, PO and PS Sille Oyan, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2:Nong Jerang Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Taben Jerang permanent resident of Mangnang Village PO and PS Sille Oyan East Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 3:James Jerang Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Shri Taben Jerang permanent resident of Mangnang Village PO and PS Sille Oyan East Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 2/5 4:John Jerang Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Shri Taben Jerang permanent resident of Mangnang Village PO and PS Sille Oyan East Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5:Tani Jerang Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Shri Taben Jerang permanent resident of Mangnang Village PO and PS Sille Oyan East Siang District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : T Taki, T Tabing,Bebeng Siboh,Tabit Tapak Advocate for the Respondent : Dicky Panging, Sr. Adv, Tenzin Tsowang,Dadi Bote Pada,Mitin Boko,Chatung Tajo,Omor Panggam,Tokge Darin,Doge Lona,Marge Doji,Daina Tamuk BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 22-05-2026 Heard Mr. T. Tapak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Doji, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This revision petition is filed against the order dated 18.12.2025 passed by the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, whereby the land dispute between the petitioner and the respondents, situated at Sille-Remi Korong, has been decided in favour of the respondents herein. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that, in respect of the land dispute between the petitioner and the respondents at the Remi-Sille area under Sille village, a Page No.# 3/5 Kebang was conducted on 24.10.2017, whereby a decision was passed settling the dispute. It was, inter alia, decided that the compensation in respect of the disputed area would be divided equally between the petitioner and Sille village in the ratio of 50:50. It was further decided that Sille village shall not have any right to claim the remaining land on the upper and lower sides of the railway track in future. Against the said decision of the Kebang, an appeal was preferred before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pasighat, which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 73/2023. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pasighat, vide order dated 29.06.2023, upheld the Kebang decision dated 24.10.2017. However, vide the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, the Circle Officer, Sille- Oyan Circle, again took up the matter and passed a decision in respect of the said disputed land, thereby holding that the disputed land in question belongs to the respondents. 4. It is submitted by Mr. T. Tapak, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, has no jurisdiction to decide a land dispute after the coming into force of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021. More so, when the land dispute in question has already been decided and settled by the Kebang decision dated 24.10.2017, which was affirmed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pasighat, vide order dated 29.06.2023, passed in Civil Appeal No. 73/2023. Therefore, the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, is without jurisdiction. 5. Mr. M. Doji, learned counsel for the respondents, fairly submits that, in fact, the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, does not have any jurisdiction to try the land dispute which has already been decided by the competent authority by settling the matter between the parties. However, he submits that the parties may be granted liberty to approach the appropriate forum against the order Page No.# 4/5 dated 29.06.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pasighat, in Civil Appeal No. 73/2023. 6. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. Upon the enactment of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021, the executive authorities, including the Circle Officer, the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, would not have any jurisdiction to decide civil disputes, as the powers of the executive authorities have been ousted by the said legislation. 8. In the present case, admittedly, the dispute between the parties had already been settled by the Kebang decision dated 24.10.2017, issued on 03.11.2017. The respondents preferred an appeal before the appellate authority being Civil Kebang Appeal No. 15/2017, which was subsequently renumbered as Civil Appeal No. 17/2023 upon transfer to the regular Civil Court. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), vide judgment and order dated 29.06.2023, upheld the Kebang decision dated 24.10.2017. Thus, the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, would not have any jurisdiction to take up the matter, as the Circle Officer has no power and authority under the law to decide a civil dispute. More so, the dispute in question has already been settled by a competent Civil Court. 9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, is without jurisdiction and non est in the eye of law. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the Circle Officer, Sille-Oyan Circle, is hereby set aside and quashed. However, the parties are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum, if aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.06.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Page No.# 5/5 Pasighat, in Civil Appeal No. 73/2023, as may be permissible under the law. 11. The civil revision petition stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant