A weekly roundup of ‘law in action’ at HC Kohima Bench
Moa Jamir
Dimapur | August 17
The Civil Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate cases based on decisions rendered by the Village Council or Dobashi (DB) Court, as well as the appointment of Gaonburas (GBs) were key issues deliberated as village administration in Nagaland took centre stage at the Guwahati High Court, Kohima Bench, this week.
One such issue was whether the statutory Civil Courts in Nagaland have been “empowered to adjudicate cases on decisions rendered by the Village Council/DB’s Court.”
During the hearing before the Division Bench of Justice Kakheto Sema and Justice Mitali Thakuria on August 14, the Advocate General (AG) Nagaland KN Balgopal submitted that the Government is seized of the matter and is in the process of coming up with a suitable solution to address the issue raised in the writ petition.
Thus, the AG sought some more time to address the issues, and the Court listed the matter for further hearing on October 16. “It is expected that on the next date fixed, the learned Advocate General shall make the instructions available before this Court,” the Court’s order stated.
Meanwhile, on August 12, the Court asked for clarification from the Nagaland Government regarding the procedures for the appointment and removal of GB positions in the State.
The case pertained to a writ petition filed in May 2022 by three GBs from Tepun village in Peren district, challenging their termination by a common order dated December 3, 2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner.
Accordingly, Justice Sema directed the Government Advocate representing the State respondents to provide detailed instructions on the procedure for both the appointment and removal of GBs. The case has been scheduled for the next hearing in three weeks.
Seyochung, NH-2, and other Issues
Meanwhile, the Court addressed the Seyochung village contempt petition on August 13. Justice Mitali Thakuria, the Nagaland AG, informed the Court that while a one-man committee was constituted, the report was already set aside as it could not be materialised and the matter is now before the Cabinet.
However, the counsel for the petitioner raised objections, arguing that the Cabinet cannot override the court's directive for compliance with the one-man commission’s report.
In this connection, the Court directed the Additional AG to file an affidavit and listed the matter for further hearing after four weeks.
As per the Court’s record, the case pertains to a “certain dispute” in Seyochung village between two tribes, Sumi and Sangtam, “relating to claims of customary rights of the original inhabitants of the village,” and the contesting parties approached this Court by filing writ petitions.
On November 28, 2018, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the Chief Secretary, Nagaland, and Home Commissioner, Nagaland, to pass an appropriate order within a period of three months from the date of the order in terms of the report of the one-man enquiry committee.
With the State respondents failing to comply with the order, the contempt petition was filed and first heard on October 31, 2019. The matter has been dragging on since then.
Additionally, on August 14, during the Public Interest Litigation (Suo Motu) hearing, the Division Bench called for the Amicus Curiae to appraise the court on the affidavits filed by the Contractor and NHIDCL. The Court scheduled the next hearing for August 21.
The Court also continued hearing a writ appeal by People for Animals (PFA) and Humane Society International/India (HSI) challenging a single-judge ruling on a dog meat ban. The next hearing is set for September 18, with the respondent’s counsel requesting an additional three weeks to file an affidavit-in-opposition.
In a review petition on August 16, Justice Thakuria overturned a January 29, 2007, judgment by the District & Sessions Judge, Mokokchung, which had convicted a Nagaland Police Constable under Section 21(a) NDPS Act, 1985, for alleged possession of brown sugar. The Court found the guilty plea lacked clarity and directed a fresh trial to be completed within six months.
