High Court of Meghalaya
Shri Sudhan Mohora vs . State Of Meghalaya & Ors. on 16 August, 2022
Serial No. 58
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 81 of 2022
Date of Decision: 16.08.2022
Shri Sudhan Mohora Vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors.
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. W.S. Gayang, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with
Ms. I. Lyngwa, GA (For R 1-4)
Mr. S.A. Sheikh, Adv. (For R 6)
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant
writ application for directions to restrain the respondents from interfering
with the petitioner's construction of the RCC Residential Com
Commercial Building Complex, and for quashing and setting aside the
impugned letter No. MUDA/WGH/IR/14/2007/143, dated 03.03.2022,
cancelling the building permission sanction of the petitioner.
2. The brief facts as portrayed in the writ petition is that the
petitioner is a lawful owner of the plot of land, and in connection thereto
had sought permission for construction from the respondent No. 6 (Town
Planning Officer) but after obtaining the building permission on
13.08.2021, the same was however revoked by the impugned order dated
03.03.2022.
3. An additional affidavit has now been filed by the petitioner
wherein it has been stated that the said building permission which had
been cancelled vide order dated 03.03.2022 has since been revoked by the
respondent No. 6, vide letter dated 13.07.2022, and the petitioner is now
allowed to continue construction activities as per the earlier building
permission.
4. Mr. W.S. Gayang, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that with the revocation of the building permission, the cause of action
before this Court no longer survives. However, he submits that there has
been an intervention and interference on the part of the State respondents
for no reason, and prays that appropriate directions be issued to restrain
the respondents from indulging in such interference.
5. Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Ms. I. Lyngwa,
learned GA for the State respondents submits that there has been no
unlawful interference, inasmuch as, whatever action taken by the police
authorities was on the basis of an FIR.
6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and
submissions made.
7. On perusal of the additional affidavit, it appears that the
grievance of the petitioner against the cancellation, no longer survives for
consideration. It is also to be noted that a Civil Suit being T.S. No. 1 of
2022 is pending before the Court of Assistant to Deputy Commissioner,
West Garo Hills, Tura, with regard to rival claims on the property.
8. In consideration thereof, as the impugned order no longer
survives for consideration, this petition is therefore closed. However it is
made clear that any grievance that may emanate as to title or counter
claims thereon, by the parties, the same shall be agitated before the Civil
Court, in the pending Title Suit.
9. With the above noted directions, this writ petitioner stands
closed and is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
Meghalaya
16.08.2022
"V. Lyndem-PS"
