Shri Toli Gamlin vs The State Of Arunachal Pradesh And 4 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 1590 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Shri Toli Gamlin vs The State Of Arunachal Pradesh And 4 Ors on 30 July, 2025

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010158742025




                                                             undefined



                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)


                            Case No. : WA/237/2025

         SHRI TOLI GAMLIN
         S/O SOKTO GAMLIN, R/O RIGO VILLAGE, P.O. AND P.S. AALO, DIST. WEST
         SIANG, ARUNACHAL PRADESH, PIN 791001



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND 4 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECY., RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF
         ARUNACHAL PRADESH, ITANAGAR, PIN 791111

         2:THE DIRECTOR

          RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT.
          GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
          ITANAGAR
          PIN 791111

         3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CEO

          RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT.
          LEPARADA DIST.
          BASAR
          ARUNACHAL PRADESH
          PIN 791101

         4:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR

          RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT.
          LEPARADA DIST.
                                                                                Page No.# 2/3

            BASAR
            ARUNACHAL PRADESH
            PIN 791101

           5:SHRI KARSEN BASAR

            EXTENSION OFFICER (RE)
            BASAR (CD BLOCK)
            LEPARADA DIST.
            ARUNACHAL PRADESH
            PIN 79110


For petitioner/appellant(s) :       Mr. P. D. Nair, Advocate


For respondent(s)               :    Mr. Arun Chandran, Sr. GA,

Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Idat Bam, Advocate

- BEFORE -

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 30.07.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 23.06.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 467/2024.

By the afore-noted judgment, it has been held that the respondent No. 5 is entitled to hold the charge of APO (RE), Basar, in the District of Leparada.

The claim of the appellant is that the decision to place the respondent No. 5 at the place, where the appellant was posted, was a politically influenced administrative action.

Notice to respondent No. 5 is accepted by Mr. Idat Bam, learned counsel, who intends to contest this appeal. He seeks a short adjournment to get ready in the matter and address this Court.

Page No.# 3/3

In case the respondent No. 5 so desires, he may file his written response to the appeal by the next date.

Re-notify on 01.09.2025.

                                        JUDGE                        CHIEF JUSTICE




Comparing Assistant