Village Dorbar Phlangjaud vs . State Of Meghalaya & Ors.
2022 Latest Caselaw 30 Meg

 Serial No. 04
 Regular List
                   HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
                         AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 257 of 2020
                                Date of Decision: 23.02.2022

Village Dorbar Phlangjaud        Vs.        State of Meghalaya & Ors.

Coram:
                 Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge


Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s)   :   Mr. P. Yobin, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) :     Mr. A.H. Kharwanlang, GA (For 1&2)

Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, Sr. Adv. with Ms. C. Nongkhlaw, Adv. (For R 3&4) Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, Adv.

vice Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, Sr. Adv. (For R 5&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)

Matter taken up via Hybrid Mode.

1. Heard Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.

A.H. Kharwanlang, learned GA for the respondent No. 1 and 2, Mr. V.G.K.

Kynta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. C. Nongkhlaw, learned

counsel for the respondent No. 3 and 4. Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, learned

counsel vice Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, learned Senior counsel for the respondent

No. 5 and 6.

2. The grievances of the petitioner's Dorbar is with regard the

amalgamation of the petitioner village with another village without

following the due process of law and customs as provided under Rule 6

(12) of the Maharam Syiemship (Administration) Rules, 2009.

3. Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

against the impugned action of the Syiem, a representation had been

preferred before the respondent No. 3 and 4, on 01.03.2019, and the same

is yet to be disposed of, which has compelled the petitioner to approach

this Court. He further, submits that at this stage his limited prayer is only

for disposal of the representation by the Executive Committee, District

Council.

4. Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. C.

Nongkhlaw, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and 4, submits that

considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the Executive Committee

may be directed to dispose of the representation which is at Annexure-XII

of the writ petition.

5. In consideration of the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior counsel for the respondent

No. 3 and 4, this writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the

respondent No. 3 and 4 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner

within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of the certified

copy of this order.

6. It is made clear that this Court had not gone into the merits of

the matter.

7. The instant writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Meghalaya 23.02.2022 "V. Lyndem-PS"