WP(C)/86/2026 of MS. GWANILE KENT Vs THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS on 21 June 2026

ORDER

Date :22-06-2026 The grievance projected by the petitioner in the instant writ petition is with regard to the inaction on the part of the respondent no. 5, who has been appointed as Inspector in terms of Section 12

(1) of the Nagaland Money Lenders Act, 2005 (Act of 2005), for not taking action pursuant to the complaint submitted by the petitioner, as far back as in 02.07.2025.

2. This Court had issued notice on 01.06.2026, and notice was accepted by Mr. K. Angami, learned Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 to 5.

3. Today, Mr. K. Angami, learned Government Advocate submits that as per the instructions received by him, the Extra Assistant Commissioner concerned who is also the Inspector in terms of the Act of 2005, has convened a meeting on 25.06.2026, at 11:00 AM, to discuss regarding the complaint submitted by the petitioner. The learned Government Advocate, therefore, submits that considering the said meeting, convened through a circular dated 19.06.2026, the Extra Assistant Commissioner who is also the Inspector under the Act of 2005 (respondent no. 5) will definitely look into the complaint and take necessary steps as per the provisions of law.

4. In support of his submission, the learned Government Advocate has produced a copy of the communication dated 19.06.2026, written by the Extra Assistant Commissioner to him and the circular dated 19.06.2026, enclosed to the said communication by which a meeting has been scheduled on 25.06.2026, at 11:00 AM, at the Dobashi Court, EAC Seithekema Office.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Kitoka Sumi, submits that the main grievance of the petitioner is with the inaction on the part of the authority concerned to the complaint submitted by the petitioner. He submits that although the circular dated 19.06.2026, has been made known to him only today, but in view of the meeting scheduled by the Extra Assistant Commissioner concerned, the grievance of the petitioner hopefully would be considered by the said authority, and therefore, he would not like to press the matter further at this stage. He however submits that the respondent authority concerned may be directed to expedite the matter, i.e., to consider and dispose of the complaint within a reasonable time.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the rival parties and upon perusal of the instructions received by the learned Government Advocate, the writ petition stands disposed of by directing the respondent authority concerned (respondent no. 5) to consider the complaint submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, in terms of the relevant provisions of the Act of 2005, and in accordance with law. It is also provided herein that if the petitioner is aggrieved with the decision to be arrived at by the authority concerned, he will be at liberty to seek redressal of his grievances as permissible in law.

7. A copy of the communication dated 19.06.2026, and the circular dated 19.06.2026, produced by Mr. K. Angami, the learned Government Advocate shall be retained in the record and marked as ‘X’ and ‘Y’ for identification. JUDGE Comparing Assistant