Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/341/2026 of Punong Tagru and Anr Vs The State of AP and 8 Ors on 28 July 2026
GAHC040011472026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/341/2026 Punong Tagru and Anr Son of Shri Tagru Tamar, a permanent resident of Gimba Village, Tali Circle, PO and PS Tali, Kra Daadi District, Arunachal
GAHC040011472026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : WP(C)/341/2026
Punong Tagru and Anr
Son of Shri Tagru Tamar, a permanent resident of Gimba Village, Tali Circle, PO and PS Tali, Kra Daadi District, Arunachal Pradesh.
2: Tagru Mangming
Age:
Occupation :
Son of Shri Tagru Tamang
a permanent resident of Gimba Village
Tali Circle
Po and PS Tali
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Prades
VERSUS
The State of AP and 8 Ors
represented by the Secretary (Land Management), Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.
2:The Commissioner (Land Management)
Age: 0
Occupation :
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
3:The Director (Land Management)
Age: 0
Occupation :
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
4:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh.
5:The District Land Revenue and Settlement Officer Age: 0
Occupation :
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh.
6:Tagru Taro
Age: 33
Occupation :
Son of Shri Tagru Rade
a permanent resident of Gimba Village
Tali Circle
PO and PS Tali
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh.
7:Tagru Talit
Age: 42
Occupation :
Son of Shri Tagru Rade
a permanent resident of Gimba Village
Tali Circle
PO and PS Tali
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh.
8:Tagru Mangsa
Age: 35
Occupation :
Son of Late Tagru Taniang
a permanent resident of Gimba Village
Tali Circle
PO and PS Tali
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh.
9:Tagru Tate
Age: 36
Occupation :
Son of Late Tagru Tapo
a permanent resident of Gimba Village
Tali Circle
PO and PS Tali
Kra Daadi District
Arunachal Pradesh
Advocate for the Petitioner : Kemo Lollen, Tojum Tao,Maryum Sora,Geli Taye,D Ado Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 29-07-2026
Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved by their exclusion from the beneficiary/affected persons list prepared in respect of acquisition of land measuring approximately 1,911 hectares situated under Chambang, Tarak Lengdi, Tali and Pipsorang Circles of Kra Daadi District, Arunachal Pradesh, for construction of 1,720 MW Kamala Hydro Electric Project (KHEP).
3. The grievance of the petitioners is that although their private/ancestral land situated at Gimba Village under Tali Circle, Kra Daadi District, has been acquired for the said project, their names have not been included in the beneficiary list published vide declaration dated 02.06.2026 issued by the Commissioner (Land Management), Department of Land Management, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. It is contended that the petitioners had submitted their claims and objections on 30.06.2026 pursuant to the notice issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, Tali Sub-Division Level Board, KHEPP, but the same have not been considered and disposed of.
4. On 27.07.2026, considering the issue involved under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and as no record was placed to indicate whether an award had been passed, learned Additional Advocate General was directed to obtain instructions in the matter.
5. Today, Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, submits that the award in respect of the land acquisition has not yet been finalized. It is further submitted that the claims and objections filed by the petitioners and other affected persons have been taken up for consideration and the process of hearing is underway.
6. Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that since the claims and objections filed by the petitioners are stated to be under consideration and the award has not yet been finalized, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the claims and objections filed by the petitioners in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that the award has not yet been finalized and the claims and objections filed by the petitioners are stated to be under consideration, this Court is of the view that no further adjudication of the issues raised in the present writ petition is required at this stage.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Kra Daadi District, Arunachal Pradesh, to consider and decide the claims and objections filed by the petitioners dated 30.06.2026, in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all other concerned parties, and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order.
9. The said exercise shall be completed expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
10. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant