Gauhati High Court - Kohima
Shri Vikato S. Aye And Anr vs The State Of Nagaland And 4 Ors on 2 April, 2026
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC020001932026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL
PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : WP(C)/35/2026
SHRI VIKATO S. AYE AND ANR
S/O LATE SHIHOVI AYE, HOUSE NO. 71, LITHSAMI VILLAGE, SURUHUTO
SUB-DIVISION, ZUNHEBOTO, NAGALAND
2: SHITHASHE CLAN
REPRESENTED BY SHRI SAHOVI AYE
S/O LATE YEVUTO AYE R/O SUGHUNA
NOTUN BOSTI
DIMAPUR
NAGALAND
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, NAGALAND, KOHIMA
2:THE COMMISSIONER
NAGALAND
KOHIMA
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
ZUNHEBOTO
NAGALAND
4:SHRI TOKHEVI AYE
S/O LATE ZHEHOVI AYE
HEAD CHIEFTAIN
LITHSUMI VILLAGE
ZUNHEBOTO
NAGALAND
5:KHEKUTO AYE
S/O LATE KIHOYI AYE
R/O PURANA BAZAR
DIMAPUR
NAGALAND
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Petitioner : Z. ZHIMOMI, NEWTON ZHIMOMI,KUPULI
SWU,LOVIKATO SWU,ZUCHAMO Y KIKON
Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
Date : 02-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel, Ms. Z. Zhimomi, for the petitioners, Shri Vikato S. Aye and Shri Sahovi Aye. Also heard learned Additional AG, Mr. L. T. Sangtam, for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the Order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland. It is submitted that an appeal was filed against the order dated 18.11.2025 passed by the Customary Court cum SDO (Civil), Suruhuto whereby and where under the petitioner was pronounced as the rightful candidate to hold the post of GBship of Shithashe clan of Lithsami Village. It is submitted that the respondent nos. 4 and 5, Shri Tokhevi Aye and Shri Khekuto Aye were also present and they were earlier signatories when the hearing dated 10.02.2024 was held. They have expressed their approval of the installation of the petitioner's Chieftainship. It is also pertinent to mention that the Xukhepu clan have also given their approval of the petitioner's installation as Chieftainship. The village council also expressed the approval of the installation of the petitioner as Chieftain on 18.11.2025.
Page No.# 3/4
3. After all the hearings were conducted, the proceedings of the hearing and the documents were submitted by the petitioner no. 1 to the Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland. The Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland, without consenting on the installation of the petitioner as GB, opined that the customary court ought to decide the matter and the matter was finally decided by the customary court in favour of the petitioner on 18.11.2025.
4. It is also pertinent to mention at this juncture that before the final order was passed by the Customary court at Suruhuto, the respondent nos. 4 and 5 expressed their dissent over the installation of the petitioner's Chieftainship before the Sumi Kukami Hoho/ Sumi Apex Chieftain Organisation.
5. After the final verdict of the Customary court, the respondent nos. 4 and 5 filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland. It is further submitted that notice was issued to the petitioner, but the petitioner received the notice only on 15.01.2026 and immediately after the notice, the petitioners learnt about the stay order through a Whatsapp group message on 31.01.2026. This stay order was passed against the judgment and order dated 18.11.2025 of the Customary Court, Suruhuto. This stay order was passed on 19.12.2025 before issuing notice or hearing the petitioner.
6. It is submitted that the stay order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland is a very harsh and arbitrary. No reasons were assigned. Notices were also not issued and prior to issuance of notice and hearing the petitioner, the Page No.# 4/4 impugned stay order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland. The order is reflected herein below verbatim:
"Stay order is hereby issued on the verdict of the DB Sumi Customary Law Court, Suruhoto, Zunheboto, Nagaland of the Case No. (04) 25, dated 18/11/2025. No provisions or settlement, of any nature, of the said verdict shall be enforced by any person or party.
This stay order shall stand until further information or order from this office on the matter.
Violation of this order by any person or party shall be dealt strictly as per relevant law."
7. I have considered the submissions at the bar. It appears that there is a prima facie case to suspend the order dated 19.12.2025, and thereby the order dated 19.12.2025 is suspended till the next date of listing.
8. In the meanwhile, issue notice to the private respondents returnable within 4 (four) weeks. As the learned Additional AG has accepted notice on behalf of the State respondents, no further notice is required to be issued to the said respondents. However, copies of the petition be furnished to the learned Additional AG.
9. List this matter after 4 (four) weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE Comparing Assistant