Page No.# 1/3 GAHC030000382026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6/2026 Smt. Lalengzuali D/o Thangzuala R/o Bungtlang, Serchhip District, Mizoram - 796181 VERSUS The State of Mizoram and 8 Ors. R/b the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Mizoram, Aizawl, Mizoram - 796001 2:The District Magistrate Serchhip District 3:The Secretary Home Department Govt. of Mizoram 4:The Superintendent of Police Serchhip District 5:The Officer-In-Charge Serchhip Police Station 6:The President Central Young Mizo Association 7:The President Page No.# 2/3 8:The President 9:The President Village Counci Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Aldrin Zothanmawia Advocate for the Respondent : Addl. AG/GA, Mizoram for R 1-5 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 09.06.2026 Heard Mr. Aldrin Zothanmawia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Lalnunhlui, learned Govt. Advocate appears for respondent Nos. 1-5 and Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for respondent No. 6. The petitioner has filed the present petition on the ground that she and her family were forcibly evicted from their residential house at Bungtlang, Serchhip by respondent No. 7, without any authority of Law and without due process of Law, thereby violating their Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part-III of the Constitution of India. Ms. Lalnunhlui, learned Govt. Advocate submits that the District Page No.# 3/3 Authorities have opened the petitioner’s house in the presence of her relatives on 19.02.2026, which was shut with a wooden plank. Further, the petitioner and her family are now living in their own house. She also submits that a meeting was convened by the Deputy Commissioner, Serchhip on 19.02.2026, which showed that the petitioner and her family were allowed to return to their house. Further, the community representative submitted a joint declaration, admitting that their action was unlawful and affirmed that they bore no ill will towards the petitioner or her family. They also undertook not to cause any disturbance to the family of the petitioner. Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 submits that the respondent No. 6 had nothing to do with the eviction of the petitioner and her family from the petitioner’s house or the boarding up of their house. On considering that the issue has been resolved, this Court does not intend to keep the matter pending in this Court. The writ petition is accordingly closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant