Page No.# 1/5
GAHC020008042022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL
PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : WP(C)/330/2022
CHENDANG SADDLE VILLAGE
REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, CHENDANG SADDLE VILLAGE COUNCIL,
TUENSANG, NAGALAND
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 6 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND
2:THE COMMISSIONER
GOVT. OF NAGALAND
CIVIL SECT. KOHIMA NAGALAND
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUENSANG NAGALAND
4:EAC(DEVELOPMENT)
TUENSANG
I-C CHINGMEI EAC HQ
5:THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER
NOKLAK NAGALAND
6:THE DIRECTOR
RURAL DEVELOPMENT NAGALAND KOHIMA
7:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
DRDA TUENSANG NAGALAN
Advocate for the Petitioner : C. T. JAMIR, SR. ADV
Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL
Page No.# 2/5
Linked Case : WP(C)/242/2023
SHRI RETSU @ RITSU
HEAD GAON BURA
CHENDANG SADDLE VILLAGE
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SHAMATOR
DISTRICT SHAMATOR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 3 ORS
THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND
CIVIL SECRETARIAT
KOHIMA
2:THE COMMISSIONER
NAGALAND
KOHIMA
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUENSANG
NAGALAND
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SHAMATOR
NAGALAND
------------
Advocate for : H MUKAM
Advocate for : GOVT ADV NL appearing for THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 3
ORS
Page No.# 3/5
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
29.02.2024
Both the writ petitions are taken up together for disposal
by this common order.
2. From a perusal of the writ petition in WP(C)
No.330/2022, it reveals that the petitioner herein has
challenged the order dated 20.03.2015 issued by the Deputy
Commissioner Tuensang. Taking into account the relevance of
the said order, the relevant portion of the said order is
reproduced herein under:-
“GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUENSANG : NAGALAND
No.CON-204/2014-15/ Dated Tuensang, the 20" March, 2015
ORDER
Consequent upon the prevailing law and order situation at
Chendang Saddle village, the residents of Chendang Saddle
village belonging to the Yimchunger community have already
vacated their houses which were subsequently burnt down on 12"
December, 2014 and 7" January, 2015 respectively, for which
investigation by the police is under process. In spite of the efforts
being made by the government for early resettlement of the
displaced families/community, it is observed that the process
apparently will take longer than expected.
In this regard, the undersigned is of the view that for all
practical aspects and judicious appropriation, the developmental
funds and activities in the village should be kept under
Page No.# 4/5
suspension. Therefore, all developmental funds from the
government to Chendang Saddle village are frozen till further
order.
(ALEM JONGSHI)
Deputy Commissioner
Tuensang”
3. From a perusal of the above quoted order it reveals that
the development fund and activities of the petitioner’s village
in WP(C) No.330/2022 was directed to be kept under
suspension for the reasons disclosed in the said order and
further, all development funds from the Government to the
petitioner’s village was frozen till further order.
4. This Court also finds it relevant to take note of that in
both the writ petitions there has been a prayer made to that
effect that funds to which the petitioners therein are entitled
to should be released by the Authorities concerned. It has
been submitted by the respondents that the said order dated
20.03.2015 no longer remains taking into account the freezing
of the development funds by the Deputy Commissioner
concerned is no longer in existence. It has also been stated by
the State respondents that due funds have been released to
the petitioner’s village in question. This Court has also dully
taken note of the submission of Mr. C. T. Jamir, the learned
Senior Counsel who submits that although certain funds have
been released but there seems to be certain misappropriation
and manipulation by the concerned authorities for which the
representatives of the petitioner’s village have been taking
appropriate steps for getting more further details.
Page No.# 5/5
5. This Court having taken into consideration that the order
dated 20.03.2015 no longer survives and the respondents’
stand to the effect that the fund are now been released is of
the opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated in
the instant writ petitions for which both the writ petitions
stand closed.
6. This Court however observes that the closing of both the
writ petitions shall not prejudice the right of the petitioners in
both the writ petitions to avail remedy if upon investigation it
is found that there is manipulation and misappropriation of the
amount to which the petitioner’s village is entitled to.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant