The question that calls for adjudication in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is identical with the question involved hi Civil Rule No.3494 of 1993. Hence, it is proposed to dispose of both the writ petitions by a single order. 2. The petitioner Shri Dona Partin in Civil Rule No.3492 of 1993 and Smti Maloti Tamuli, the writ petitioner in Civil Rule No.3494 of 1993 moved this Court invoking the writ jurisdiction to quash the order dated 30.11.93 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, East Siang District, Pasighat under Memo No.ESR/ LR-36/90 directing the writ petitioners to vacate the land under their occupation. 3. The contention of Shri Dona Partin in Civil Rule No.3492 of 1993 is that he has been in occupation of a plot of land measuring about 150 yards x 150 yards at Pasighat since 1962. The land was reclaimed after heavy expenditure whereon he had constructed a building for residence covering more than 50 x 50 sq feet According to him, the said plot was never reserved by the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh either for public or the Govt. purpose. As there is no statute to regulate the Govt. land in Arunachal Pradesh, the petitioner applied before the Deputy Commissioner for regularisation of the land under his possession in pursuance of a non-statutory land allotment system introduced by the State Govt. in 1963. But the Deputy Commissioner regularised his possession on a part of land with an assurance to regularise possession of the remaining part in due course. But eventually, he was directed by the Deputy Commissioner to withdraw from the excess land. 4. The writ petitioner in Civil Rule No.3494 of 1993 averred that she was allotted a plot of land measuring 1780 sq Metre by the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh vide letter REV.2/64-65/101 dated 26th September, 1964 on compassionate ground. She has been in possession thereof for the last 30 years by raising dwelling house. It is further submitted that the State Govt. regularised possession of land occupied by some Govt. officials and influential persons while, in her case, she was served with an order under Memo No.ESR/LR-36/90 dated 30.11.93 to vacate a part of the land under her possession. 5. In both the cases, the respondents in their counter affidavit submitted that the writ petitioners are in possession of excess land and, as such, they are liable to be evicted. officials and influential persons while, in her case, she was served with an order under Memo No.ESR/LR-36/90 dated 30.11.93 to vacate a part of the land under her possession. 5. In both the cases, the respondents in their counter affidavit submitted that the writ petitioners are in possession of excess land and, as such, they are liable to be evicted. The learned Advocate Sri C. Baruah for the petitioners and the learned Advocate General Mrs N. Saikia submitted that as on today, there is no statute in Arunachal Pradesh regulating the process of settlement of Govt. land to the unauthorised occupants. However, a copy of a circular issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh in the Department of Land Records has been submitted by him drawing attention of this Court that the State Govt. have decided to regularise unauthorised and illegal possession of Govt. land on certain terms and conditions. Shri Baruah further submitted that the Govt. have directed all the Deputy Commissioners of the State to regularise the possession of unauthorised occupants after assessment of their actual requirement. In view of this, Shri Baruah submits that a direction to the State Govt. may be issued by this Court to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh to complete the process of regularisation within a period of 3 (three) months. The learned Additional Advocate General in reply submitted that she has no objection if such a direction is given for settlement of the land as per terms of the circular referred to above. 6. In view of the submission of the learned Advocate of both the parties, it is hereby ordered that the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh should take appropriate steps for allotment of land to the writ petitioners within a period of 3 (three) months as per terms incorporated in the Circular No.LR-47/87 dated 25.10.94. Till such regularisation, the possession of the writ petitioners shall not be disturbed. 7. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are disposed of. Registry to communicate this order to the respondents within 7 (seven) days.