JUDGMENT : KARDAK ETE, J. 1. Heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. G. Tarak, learned Standing counsel for the Rural Works Department, representing the respondent no. 1; Mr. I. Riram, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents no. 2 and 3 and Mr. T. Bayor, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. By instituting this petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Mechukha, Shi-Yomi District vide no. MKA/JUD-104/KEBGEN/2021 by which the land namely Lame Nego has been held to be belonged to respondent no. 4. 3. The brief case of the petitioners is that the family of the petitioners have been in possession of a plot of land located at Dorjeeling village, Mechukha, which is locally known as Daba Kigar since last 4 (four) generations. In the year 1987, Shri Pem Chonga Kirgar, private respondent no. 4 herein, made a complaint before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Mechukha by raising a land dispute between him and one Shri Tashi Phelley. Pursuant to the said complaint, a Kebang was held on 09.01.1987 between the respondent no. 4 and Shri Tashi Phelley. The Kebang decided the land namely, Dangdong Chokeng, Nib Simehi Area, Lame Nego and Doriangeha in favour of the respondent no. 4 and the land, namely Golak was divided between the respondent no. 4 and the said Tashi Phelley. The contention of the petitioners is that the land Daba Kigar was never an issue before the kebang held in the year 1987. 4. In the year 2022, the respondent no. 4 had encroached in the Daba Kigar land of petitioners and started constructing road and bridges under Government scheme of Public Works Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh without the knowledge and consent of the petitioners. On such encroachment, the petitioners have tried to resolve the matter locally and reported the matter before the village authority. However, the dispute could not be resolved by the village authority. Having no option left, the petitioners submitted a representation dated 02.05.2022 before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shi-Yomi District, Mechukha for immediate suspension of construction work carried out by the respondent no. 4 at Daba Kigar land. Pursuant to the said complaint, the Additional Deputy Commissioner has directed that till clarification of the matter, the ongoing work should be halted and directed the respondent no. 4 at Daba Kigar land. Pursuant to the said complaint, the Additional Deputy Commissioner has directed that till clarification of the matter, the ongoing work should be halted and directed the respondent no. 4 to report on 05.05.2022. The petitioners were also directed to report to the Office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner on 12.05.2022 in connection with the dispute over the said Land. 5. The Additional Deputy Commissioner vide no. MKA/JUD-104/KEB-GEN/2021 dated 01.08.2022 passed the impugned order, whereby it is held that Lame Nego belong to the respondent no. 4 and the petitioners have no right to claim over the Lame Nego land, thereby, the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner has decided the title of the disputed land. Being aggrieved of the order dated 01.08.2022, the petitioners are before this Court by filing the present application. 6. Mr. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Mechukha is without jurisdiction. While referring to the judgment and order of this Court in the case of the Registrar General vs. Union of India and Others, 2013 (4) GLT 1109, he submits that the Hon’ble High Court has held that the administration of justice by regularly constituted Courts manned by the judicial officer of the cadre will function as per the Civil Court Act and to that extent the North East Frontier (Administration of Justice), 1945 conferring judicial powers on the executive will cease to operate. He further submits that on the enactment of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Court Act, 2021, the Deputy Commissioner/ Additional Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to determine the title and interest over land in dispute. He further submits that under Section 40 read with Section 5 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice), Regulation 1945 and Section 2 (d) of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Court Act, 2021, the customary Court has been empowered to take up civil dispute. Therefore, the Additional Deputy Commissioner has passed the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 without any jurisdiction for which he prays for setting aside the same. 7. Mr. G. Tarak, learned Standing counsel for the Rural Works Department, representing the respondent no. 1 and Mr. I. Riram, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents no. Therefore, the Additional Deputy Commissioner has passed the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 without any jurisdiction for which he prays for setting aside the same. 7. Mr. G. Tarak, learned Standing counsel for the Rural Works Department, representing the respondent no. 1 and Mr. I. Riram, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents no. 2 & 3, submits that the Additional Deputy Commissioner has passed the order on the basis of the materials available in the Office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shi Yomi District, Mechukha. The Additional Deputy Commissioner passed the order on the perusal of the documents submitted by the respondent no. 4 which shows that a Kebang was held vide order No. MK/JDLS(A)15 dated 09.01.1987, whereby, it is clearly mentioned that the land namely Lame Nego was awarded to the respondent no. 4 by the Kebang Body. 8. Mr. Bayor, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 submits that there is no any plot of land known as Daba Kigar. Daba Kigar was the forefather of the present petitioners and the respondent no. 4. There is nothing on record to prove that the land in question was named as Daba Kigar rather the land in question belong to their forefather which is popularly known as Lame Nego. He further submits that the land Lame Nego has been awarded to the respondent no. 4 way back in 1987 by a Kebang decision dated 09.01.1987, wherein a dispute was in between the respondent no. 4 and one Shri Tashi Phelley. Therefore, the Additional Deputy Commissioner vide order dated 01.08.2022 has rightly held that the land namely Lame Nego belongs to the respondent no. 4 and the petitioners have no any right to claim over the Lame Nego land. 9. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and also perused the materials on record. 10. On a careful perusal of the impugned order dated 01.08.2022, it transpires that on the complaint of the petitioners dated 02.05.2022 the Additional Deputy Commissioner has taken up the matter by summoning the petitioners and the respondent no. 4. It is also seen that the respondent no. 4 also made a counter complaint on 09.05.2022. The learned Additional Deputy Commissioner has decided the dispute over the land namely Lame Nego on the basis of the documents submitted by the respondent no. 4. It is also seen that the respondent no. 4 also made a counter complaint on 09.05.2022. The learned Additional Deputy Commissioner has decided the dispute over the land namely Lame Nego on the basis of the documents submitted by the respondent no. 4, particularly the kebang decision dated 09.01.1987, whereby, the land Lame Nego was awarded to the respondent no. 4 by holding that the petitioners have no right to claim over the Lame Nego land. However, the dispute raised by the petitioners is in respect of the land called Daba Kigar, which is shown to be located in a different area away from the land Lame Nego. 11. On consideration of the Kebang decision dated 09.01.1987, it is seen that the land Lame Nego was awarded to the respondent no. 4 by the Kebang body which is not in dispute, in a way the Additional Deputy Commissioner may be correct in holding that the land Lame Nego was awarded to the respondent no. 4 but the issue raised by the petitioners as noted above is in respect of the Daba Kigar area for which the petitioners have alleged that the respondent no. 4 has encroached their land by constructing road and bridges for implementation of Government scheme under the Public Works Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioners have approached the Additional Deputy Commissioner for suspension of the work which is undertaken by the respondent no. 4 over the land of the petitioners until the case is resolved. 12. Considering the judgment and order of this Court in the case of Registrar General (supra) coupled with the enactment of Arunachal Pradesh Civil Court Act, 2021, the Additional Deputy Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner is no longer having jurisdiction to try and decide the Civil dispute. 13. In the present case as noted above, the Additional Deputy Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 has decided the matter in favour of the respondent no. 4 with regard to the Lame Nego land, however, the dispute raised is with regard to the land called Daba Kigar, which is shown to be a different plot of land which is supported by the photograph annexed to the writ petition. 4 with regard to the Lame Nego land, however, the dispute raised is with regard to the land called Daba Kigar, which is shown to be a different plot of land which is supported by the photograph annexed to the writ petition. In any case, in view of the judgment and order of this Court in Registrar General (supra) and after the enactment of Arunachal Pradesh Civil Court Act, 2021, the Additional Deputy Commissioner would not have any jurisdiction. 14. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Mechukha, Shi-Yomi District vide no. MKA/JUD-104/ KEB-GEN/2021 deserve to be interfered with. 15. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Mechukha, Shi-Yomi District vide no. MKA/JUD-104/KEB-GEN/2021 is hereby set aside and quashed. 16. However, the parties are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum as may be permissible under the law for appropriate order within 1 (one) month. It is provided that till the parties obtain appropriate order from the appropriate authority/forum, the parties are directed to maintain status-quo.