THE JALUKIE VILLAGE COUNCIL v. THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 6 ORS
Court: Gauhati High Court
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH,HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Judgment date:
Case summary
Gauhati High Court judgment dated 2024-02-28. THE JALUKIE VILLAGE COUNCIL v. THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 6 ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Page No. # 1/3 GAHC020003902023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WA/9/2023 THE JALUKIE VILLAGE COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR. HAINKIENG, S/O LATE INGAULUNG, R/O OLD JALUKIE VILLAGE, DIST- PEREN, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION KOHIMA NAGALAND 3:THE PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER PEREN NAGALAND 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PEREN NAGALAND 6:SHRI. KIIGUM PERMANENT R/O PUILWA VILLAGE PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NEW JALUKIE TOWN PEREN NAGALAND 7:SMTI. WIDUNSU W/O MR. N. WLIA R/O JALUKIE -B VILLAGE PEREN NAGALAN Advocate for the Petitioner : A. ZHIMOMI Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL Page No. # 2/3 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 28. 02. 2024 (D.
Baruah, J. ) The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by certain observations made in the judgment and order dated 30. 05. 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 316/2017. 2. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as the State respondents. 3. The appellant is aggrieved by the contents of paragraph Nos. 12, 20 & 21 of the said judgment and order dated 30. 05. 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 316/2017 wherein the learned Single Judge had made certain observations that the Appellant Village has received certain compensation for a particular plot of land. 4. We have duly taken note of that the Appellant Village was not a party to the said writ proceedings. The only grievance which we could discern from the submission of Ms.
Lhousino, the learned counsel for the Appellant is that those observations would show that the Appellant Village had taken compensation which is not true and these observations have been without hearing the Appellant Village. She further submitted that the Appellant village did not take away Page No. # 3/3 compensation and as such the observations so made particularly at paragraph Nos. 12, 20 & 21 of the impugned judgment and order dated 30. 05. 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 316/2017 may affect the Appellant Village in future if not put to challenge. 5. Taking into account the above grievance and also the fact that the Appellant was not a party in the writ proceedings, we observe that the observations made in paragraph Nos. 12, 20 & 21 of the impugned judgment shall not be binding upon the Appellant Village and further shall not act to their prejudice. 6.
We have however made it clear that we have not dealt with the other issues which have been decided in the impugned judgment and order dated 30. 05. 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 316/2017 in so far as the dispute between the petitioner therein vis-à-vis the respondents therein. 7. In view of the above, the instant appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Source: Gauhati High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.