1. Heard Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.392(AP)/2012, Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.60(AP) 2012 and WP(C) No.208(AP) 2012, Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the Misc. applicants in MC [WP(C) No. l (AP)/2015, Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners in Cont. Cas. (C) No.l4 (AP)/2014. 2. Mr. S. Tapin, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in WP(C) No.392(AP) 2012, Mr. Ajin Apang, learned senior counsel for respondent No. 11, Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 10 and 13, Mr. G. Tarak, learned counsel for the respondent No. 15, Mr. Muk Pertin, learned senior counsel for respondent Nos. 32 and 33 in WP(C) No.60(AP) 2012, Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 9 to 23 in WP(C) No.208(AP)/2012, Mr. Muk Pertin, learned senior counsel for the respondent/Contemnor No. 23. 3. The petitioner's case in WP(C) No. 392(AP)/2012 is that they have occupied several plots of land since long. Prior to their occupation in the year 1980 and after their occupation they developed the land making it fit for human settlement by clearing the jungles by way of earth cutting etc. Some of the petitioners have constructed OBT structures thereupon and settled there with their families. According to them, there are more than 250 individuals settled on the land. 4. In WP(C) No. 60(AP)/2012, the petitioner No. 2 claims himself to be representative/president of petitioner No. 1, i.e., All Arunachal Pradesh Abotani Nyijuk Nyibu Welfare Association ('AAPANNWA'),. and has filed the writ petition seeking direction to respondent No. 2, i.e., the Commissioner/Secretary, Home, Government of Arunachal Pradesh to carry out Board recommendation made in pursuant to the judgment and order dated 17.3.2009 passed by this court in WP(C) No.346(AP)/2008 and for direction to the Chief Estate Officer to evict all private respondents and other settlers in terms of board recommendation. 5. In WP(C) No. 208(AP)/2012, the petitioners are again AAPANNWA, represented by petitioner No. 2 and others. In this writ petition also petitioners have prayed for direction to carry out the Board recommendation made in pursuant to the judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.346(AP)/2008 and to restrain the encroachers from encroaching the land from the petitioners. Several miscellaneous cases including a Contempt Petition have been filed alleging violation of the order passed by this court. 6. In this writ petition also petitioners have prayed for direction to carry out the Board recommendation made in pursuant to the judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.346(AP)/2008 and to restrain the encroachers from encroaching the land from the petitioners. Several miscellaneous cases including a Contempt Petition have been filed alleging violation of the order passed by this court. 6. Further the case of the petitioners in WP(G) No. 392(AP)/2012 is that since the year 2003 one Sri Hari Taro (respondent No. 11) started claiming the entire Jamme Jate area measuring 10 lakhs Sq. Mtr as his ancestoral property. According to the respondent No. 10, namely, All Arunachal Pradesh Abotani Nyijuk Nyibti Welfare Association, the association presided by respondent No. 11 approached the Government to issue Land Possession Certificate ('LPC') in respect of entire land of jamme jate area for establishment of model village to be inhabitated exclusively by the persons professing to the Donyi-Polo religion, however, the Government denied issuing such LPC, for the reason that the Jamme Jate area is inhabited by large number of other people including the petitioners. When the respondent failed to get the Land Possession Certificate from the Government, he filed a writ petition being WP(C) No. 346(AP)/2008 seeking appropriate direction from this court. Some of the petitioners herein contested the said writ petition. This court vide its judgment and order dated 17.3.2009 directed the concerned authority to constitute a Committee and to convene its meeting for the purpose of verification and examination of the dispute over the Jamme Jate area after serving due notice to all the persons concerned. Accordingly, the Committee/Board was constituted by the respondent authorities. 7. The allegation of the petitioners is that the Committee/Board did not give any prior notice to the petitioners and other inhabitant of Jamme Jate area and in violation of the judgment and order of this court recommended for allotment of vast stretch of Jamme Jate area in favour of respondent Nos. 10 and 11. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Capital Complex, Naharlagun vide the impugned office Memo No. DC/ ICC/JUD/DEV-114/209/1761 dated 18.11.2011 forwarded the impugned Board recommendations to the Director of Land Management (respondent No.2), Itanagar for further action and also for Government approval. 8. 10 and 11. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Capital Complex, Naharlagun vide the impugned office Memo No. DC/ ICC/JUD/DEV-114/209/1761 dated 18.11.2011 forwarded the impugned Board recommendations to the Director of Land Management (respondent No.2), Itanagar for further action and also for Government approval. 8. The petitioner's further contention is that they were not given opportunity to adduce evidence to substantiate their claims over those plots of land recommended for allotment in favour of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 by the Committee/Board. The Committee himself illegally and in violation of the principles of natural justice arrived at the conclusion ex parte by considering the claim of the respondent No. 11, despite the fact that the petitioners have been in occupation of the land recommended for the allotment of land in favour of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 over those plots of land under their occupation. 9. It is the allegation of the petitioners that AAPANNWA under the leadership of respondent No. 10 has been collecting huge donation from the public by promising them plot of land at Jamme Jate area. The respondent No. 10 has been using the banner for his own personal interest. Further, the allegation of the petitioners is that the recommendation of the Board for establishment of Model Village at Jamme Jate Area to be exclusively inhabited by the person professing Donyi-Polo religion offend the secular values enshrined in constitution of India, violating the articles 14 and 15 of Constitution of India. In fact, the petitioners and other inhabitants of Jamme Jate area profess different religion, therefore, any move to disturb peaceful co-existence at the instance of respondent No. 11 will disturb the communal harmony in the area. 10. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the land dispute pertaining to Jamme Jate area is a dispute of ownership and title over the plots of land and thus the dispute is civil in nature involving disputed question of facts. The petitioners have filed this writ petitions apprehending that the State Government would grant its approval for allotment of the disputed land to the respondent No. 11 and its association in terms of impugned Board proceeding and recommendation and in that eventuality the petitioners would be evicted from their respective land in occupation at Jamme Jate Area. The petitioners have prayed to : 1. The petitioners have prayed to : 1. Issue a writ of certiorari setting aside and quashing the impugned proceedings, findings and recommendations dated nil (Annexures 4) made by the five members Board/Committee (respondent No. 4) pursuant to the Judgment and order dated 17.3.2009 passed by this hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No. 346/2008. 2. Issue a writ of certiorari setting aside and quashing the impugned Office memo No. DC/ICC/JUD/DEV-114/209/1761 dated 18.11.2011 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Capital Complex, Naharlagun, respondent No. 3 (Annexure 5) forwarding thereby the impugned Committee/ Board's Recommendations pertaining to the Jame Jate dispute to the Director of Land management, Itanagar, (respondent No. 2) for Government approval. 3. Issue a writ of Mamdamus directing the State respondents not to grant its approval for issuance of allotment order/land possession certificate in respect of those plots of land under occupation of the petitioners and other inhabitant of the Jamme Jate area to the private respondents 10 and 11 in terms of the impugned Board/Committee's recommendations. 4. Grant liberty to the petitioners to file an appropriate suit before the competent trial court for protection of their interest over those plots of land under their possession. 5. Pass such others order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 11. The respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in their joint affidavit-in-opposition have alleged that the petitioner Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 13 are illegally encroacher who have forcefully occupied the land within the Jamme Jate area in the month of December, 2011 by forming a new association called Jamme Jate Owner Committee in violation of the judgment and order dated 17.3.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 346(AP)/2008. According to them, the petitioners are not the resident of Jame Jate Village. The petitioner Nos. 2 and 8 illegally occupied plots of land within the Jamme Jate Village only in the year 2006 by encroachment. The petitioner Nos. 3, 4 and 11 similarly occupied the land forcefully in the year 2007. The petitioners, thus, did not have land in their possession within the Jamme Jate Village prior to the year 2006. The contention of the respondents are that All Arunachal Pradesh Abotani Nyijuk Nyibu Welfare Association is a registered society having its legal identity to possess and own properties to its own. The petitioners, thus, did not have land in their possession within the Jamme Jate Village prior to the year 2006. The contention of the respondents are that All Arunachal Pradesh Abotani Nyijuk Nyibu Welfare Association is a registered society having its legal identity to possess and own properties to its own. The petitioners who inherited the area of Jamme Jate Village donated the land for establishment of Model Village for settlement of All Arunachal Pradesh Abotani Nyijuk Nyibu Community of Arunachal Pradesh. According to the respondent Nos. 10 and 11, in pursuant to the order passed by this court, a committee was constituted by the respondent authority and petitioner Nos. 2 and 8 were heard by the committee whereas the rest of the petitioners being the encroacher were not entitled to be heard, as they occupied the land after passing of the judgment and order dated 19.3.2009. As per the decision of the settlement committee, the occupants of the Jamme Jate Village area, who occupied the land prior to 2006 should be allowed to reside at Jamme Jate Village. However, the decision of the settlement committee is not a final decision with regard to owner ship/title and occupation over the land. However, the Committee recommended the allotment of an area of 3,13,340 lakh sq. mtrs. Only in favour of respondent No. 10. The illegally occupied land of the petitioners does not fall under the said recommended area and except petitioner Nos. 2 and 8, other petitioners being encroachers are not entitled to be heard in terms of judgment and order dated 19.3.2009. 12. The respondent No. 3 in his affidavit-in-opposition has averred that the entire Jamme Jate area falls under the cadestral map of Itanagar Capital Complex. The petitioners as well as the private respondents have illegally occupied the aforesaid area and litigating against each other. As per the direction of the court and to settle the issues once for all, a committee was constituted and the committee recommended that those who occupied the land prior to the order 2006 may not be disturbed and each individual land owner shall have to apply for allotment of land for regularization of their unauthorized occupation to the appropriate authority since the area falls under the Government land. However, none of the petitioners/respondents individuals have approached the authority for allotment of the land in their occupation, instead they are fighting with each other in the court and unnecessarily dragging the Government between them. 13. On perusal of the recommendation of the Board as well as from the pleadings filed by the parties, it appears that the entire area of Jamme Jate falls within the Capital town notified area. The land in question admittedly is a Government land. The petitioners as well as the private respondent are claiming the land on the basis of their occupation. Who is in fact in occupation of the land, and since, when, and whether they have acquired any title over the land in question on the basis of their occupation, are all disputed question of facts. Thus, the dispute between the parties are civil in nature and the parties should approach the competent civil court for settlement of their dispute over the land. The writ court is not a competent to decide the disputed question of facts. The stand of the Government authority is that the land in dispute is a Government land within the notified area of Capital Complex, Itanagar and no allotment has been made to any organization or any individual. 14. In view of the above, these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. 15. The recommendation of the Committee/Board is hereby set aside and quashed. The parties are, however, at liberty to approach the competent civil court for establishment of their claim. The parties are also at liberty to approach the competent authority for allotment of land in their possession in accordance with law. The writ petitions are dismissed. Miscellaneous Cases and Contempt Petition accordingly stands disposed of.