Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/225/2026 of Dr Sopai Tawsik Vs The State of AP and 5 Ors on 19 May 2026
GAHC040007212026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/225/2026 Dr Sopai Tawsik Son of Late Kamguso Tawsik, resident of Village Tissue, PO Medo, PS Wakro, Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh 792001 VERSUS The State
GAHC040007212026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : WP(C)/225/2026
Dr Sopai Tawsik
Son of Late Kamguso Tawsik, resident of Village Tissue, PO Medo, PS Wakro, Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh 792001
VERSUS
The State of AP and 5 Ors
represented by the Secretary, Department of Land Management, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh.
2:The Director of Land Management
Age: 0
Occupation :
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar 791111
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Tezu
Lohit District
Arunachal Pradesh.
4:The District Land Revenue and Settlement Officer Age: 0
Occupation :
Tezu
Lohit District
Arunachal Pradesh.
5:The National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited Age: 0
Occupation :
New Delhi.
6:The Executive Director (Projects)
Age: 0
Occupation :
NHIDCL Regional Office
Itanagar
GD Apartment
Senki Park
Division-IV
near Govt Middle School
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh 79111
Advocate for the Petitioner : Sunil Mow, Ebo Mili,Tenzin Chhoten,Chanya Bangsia,Sonam Tsomo,k N Maling 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 : 20.05.2026 Heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, who after arguing the matter at some length, fairly submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to approach the appropriate authority in view of the provisions of Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General for the State, is present. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed on withdrawal, with liberty to approach the appropriate authority in terms of Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Needless to observe that, in the event the petitioner approaches the authority concerned by filing an appropriate application, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant