JUDGMENT AND ORDER : L.S. Jamir, J. Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. Angami, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 4 as well as Mr. Kekhriengulie, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7. 2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the forwarding letter dated 15-04-2016 written by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Chiephobozou and the approval of the Government dated 16-09-2016 of new Village Council Member (VCM) in respect of respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village under Kohima District, Nagaland. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the E.A.C., Botsa by letter dated 07-03-2016, submitted a report on the election/selection of VCM in respect of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village wherein, the names of the petitioners were included as VCMs. However, the names of the petitioners were dropped in the level of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Chiephobozou as indicated in the forwarding letter dated 15-04-2016. The alteration of the names of the VCMs in respect of the Tsiemekhuma Basa Village at the level of Additional Deputy Commissioner, Chiephobozou was not known to the petitioners. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima by letter dated 19-09-2016 had conveyed the approval of the newly selected/elected VCMs under Kohima District including the Tsiemekhuma Basa Village. The Government by its approval dated 16-09-2016 had approved four names of the new VCMs in respect of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village. However, out of the four names, it is alleged that three VCMs were never selected/elected by the clan members and that they are not the resident of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village. The three VCMs are the private respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 in the present writ petition. Therefore, the Head GB and another GB of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village made a complaint against the selection of the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 as VCMs of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Botsa on 03-10-2016. Further, the present petitioners along with one Keviso Metha had also made a representation against the selection of VCMs before the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima on 08- 03-2016. 4. The main contentions of the petitioners before this Court is that the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 as VCMs of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Botsa on 03-10-2016. Further, the present petitioners along with one Keviso Metha had also made a representation against the selection of VCMs before the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima on 08- 03-2016. 4. The main contentions of the petitioners before this Court is that the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 are not residents of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village and that they are engaged in some other business in Kohima Town and therefore, they could not have been elected/selected as VCMs of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village. 5. On the other hand, the private respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 contend that they are permanent residents of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village and therefore though they may not be residing in the said village, there is no bar under the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1978') to be elected/selected as VCMs of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village. Further, the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 claim that they have certificates issued by the GB of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village that they are permanent residents of the said village. It is also the case of the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 that not being satisfied with the initial selection/election of VCM's, they had also made a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima on 06-03-2016. 6. This Court, after noticing the complaint dated 03-10-2016 made by the Head GB and GB before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Botsa, the complaint dated 31-10-2016 made before the Additional Deputy Chiephobozou, Kohima and another compliant made by the petitioners and another person on 08-03-2016 to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima as well as the counter-complaint made by the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 on 06-03-2016 before the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, had directed the learned Government Advocate to produce the records in order to ascertain as to whether such complaints have been placed before the State Government in terms of Section 20 of the Act of 1978. 7. Mr. K. Angami, learned Government Advocate has produced the records and on perusal of the same it is seen that the complaints and the counter-complaint were never placed before the State Government and the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima had taken a decision at his own level. 7. Mr. K. Angami, learned Government Advocate has produced the records and on perusal of the same it is seen that the complaints and the counter-complaint were never placed before the State Government and the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima had taken a decision at his own level. With regard to Section 20 of the Act of 1978, this Court has already settled the mater in W.P (C) No. 234 (K) of 2006 in the case of Mr. Poseruh Lohe and Others v. The State of Nagaland and Others by order dated 16-11-2007. The operative portion is reproduced herein below:- "while considering the present writ petition, what needs to be noted is that Section 20 of Nagaland Village and Area Act, 1978, casts a duty on the State Government to resolve the dispute if any dispute arises with regard to the selection of members of a village council. This is the statutory obligation, which the State Government has the onus to discharge. The State Government, in the present case, appears to have shirked this responsibility of directing the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur to resolve the dispute. Though it is not wholly improper for the State Government to seek assistance of the Deputy Commissioner in resolving the dispute, the State Government cannot absolve itself of the responsibility by taking a final decision in the matter, for, such an approach would amount to abdicating its statutory duty. Part IX and IC (A) of the Constitution of India conceive of running of governance involving people at the grass-root level. The abdication of its responsibility by the State to take action according to law, which it has itself framed, would amount to refusing to carry out the constitutional obligation of the State. Situated thus, it is clear that the order dated 23-02-2006 needs to be set aside and the State Government need to be directed to consider afresh the matter of constitution of the village council in respect of Diezephe Village. Considering therefore, the matter in its entirety and in the interest of justice, the order dated 23-02-2006, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Nagaland is hereby directed to deal with the matter in accordance with the provisions of Section 20 of the said Act and dispose of the same in accordance with law. The whole exercise, so directed, shall be completed within a period of two months from today." 8. The whole exercise, so directed, shall be completed within a period of two months from today." 8. In view of the settled position of law with regard to Section 20 of the Act of 1978 and considering that there is a dispute with regard to selection/election of members of Village Council of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima had wrongly settled the matter at his level instead of placing the same before the State Government to take an appropriate decision. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima to forward complaints made by the Head GB and GB before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Botsa on 03-10-2016, the complaint made by the Head GBs of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village before the Additional Deputy Chiephobozou, Kohima on 31-10-2016 and another compliant made by the petitioners and another on 08-03-2016 to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima as well as the complaint made by the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 on 06-03-2016 before the Deputy Commissioner before the State Government for taking a final decision as provided under Section 20 of the Act of 1978. Considering that the matter has been lingering for a considerable period of time, it is further directed that the State Government shall deal with the matter in accordance with the provision of Section 20 of the Act of 1978 and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court. Consequently, the impugned forwarding letter dated 15-04-2016 of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Chiephobozou and the Government approval list of VCM's in respect of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village as contained in the forwarding letter dated 19th September, 2016 of the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima are set aside and quashed. 10. It is also the consensus of the learned counsel for the parties that due to the pendency of this case, the developmental activities of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village has come to a standstill and therefore, an appropriate direction be issued to look into the matter. 10. It is also the consensus of the learned counsel for the parties that due to the pendency of this case, the developmental activities of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village has come to a standstill and therefore, an appropriate direction be issued to look into the matter. In that view of the matter and to ensure that the developmental activities of the Tsiemekhuma Basa Village is not effected and that the inhabitants of the village concerned do not suffer due to the lack of developmental activities, it is directed that in terms of Section 22 of the Act of 1978, the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Botsa, Kohima shall have control over the activities of Tsiemekhuma Basa Village Council and work accordingly subject to the general superintendence of the State Government so that the developmental activities of the said village does not suffer. 11. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. 12. No costs.