High Court of Meghalaya
Shri. Abdul Hashem Sheikh vs State Of Meghalaya Represented By The on 30 May, 2024
Author: H.S.Thangkhiew
Bench: H.S.Thangkhiew
Serial No.07
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C). No. 88 of 2022
Date of Decision :30.05.2024
1. Shri. Abdul Hashem Sheikh,
Aged about 47 years
Son of Shri. Banu Sk
(Parent & Donor Member of the School)
R/o Vill-Magurmari, P.O.Haripur,
P.S - Phulbari,
District - West Garo Hills,
Meghalaya, Pin - 794104.
2. Shri. Abdul Aziz Sk,
Aged about 49 years
Son of Late Hazaral Ali
(Parent in the School)
R/o Vill-Magurmari, P.O. Haripur,
P.S. - Phulbari,
District West Garo Hills,
Meghalaya, Pin - 794104.
...Petitioners
-Versus-
1. State of Meghalaya represented by the
Chief Secretary, Shillong.
2. The Director of School Education and
Literacy, Meghalaya, Shillong.
3. The District School Education Officer,
West Garo Hills District, Tura.
1
4. Shri. Abdur Roshid,
S/o Late Kosim Uddin
Gaonbura of Magurmari village and
Member of the existing Managing Committee
R/o Vill-Magurmari, P.O. Haripur,
P.S. - Phulbari,
Dist-West Garo Hills, Meghalaya,
Pin - 794104.
5. Managing Committee represented by its Secretary,
Shri. Abdul Mozid Sk
S/o Late Hazaral Ali
R/o Vill-Magurmari, P.O. Haripur,
P.S. - Phulbari,
Dist-West Garo Hills, Meghalaya,
Pin - 794104.
...Respondents
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge.
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. T.Dkhar, Adv.
Ms. P.Biswakarma, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K.P.Bhattacharjee, GA for R 1-3.
Mr. S.A.Sheikh, Adv. and
Mr. L.N.Arengh, Adv. for R 4 & 5.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
2
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. By this writ petition, the approval of the Managing Committee of
the Magurmari Government Aided Secondary School, West Garo Hills
District for the term 13-11-2021 to 14-11-2024 has been questioned.
2. Mr. T. Dkhar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioners are the parents/representatives of the children studying in the
School, and that the approval of the Managing Committee was on the
basis of a resolution of a meeting that was never held. Learned counsel
submits that the meeting alleged to have been convened on 14-11-2021, for
reconstitution of the Managing Committee is bogus, and the fact that the
names of the writ petitioners had been entered as members of the
Managing Committee is without their consent or knowledge. He further
submits that in view of the illegal action of the respondent Nos. 4 & 5, the
writ petitioners along with the concerned villagers had filed a complaint,
apart from filing RTI applications before the District School Education
Officer.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this
Court to the proceedings of the general meeting alleged to have been held
on 14-11-2021, annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is contended
that the names appearing at Sl. No. 5 which is stated to be of the writ
petitioner and the signature therein, has been fabricated as the writ
petitioner was never present in the said meeting, nor his signature
appended to the said proceedings. Similarly, he submits that the same is
also with regard to Sl. No. 7, whose name has been entered by
handwriting.
4. In this backdrop, it is argued by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the meeting being contrived, and names being inserted
without the knowledge of the writ petitioners, the meeting is vitiated and
as such, the resolution arrived thereon, should not have been approved by
the State respondents. He therefore, prays that the Managing Committee be
declared illegal and directions be issued for fresh reconstitution.
5. Mr. K.P.Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing for the respondent
Nos. 1-3 in reply to the submissions, has taken this Court to the affidavit
filed on behalf of the respondent No. 3 to show that on the complaint of the
villagers and other persons which includes the writ petitioners, notice was
issued to the President, Secretary, Headmaster and the Gaonbura, and the
complainants who were called for a meeting for clarification with regard to
the queries raised in the complaint questioning the proceedings dated 14-
11-2021. He further submits that in the meeting which was chaired by the
District School Education Officer, Tura, some of the complainants were
present and in fact, in the said meeting, counter allegations were made that
the signatures of some of the complainants had been taken from the
villagers by manipulation.
6. It is further submitted that the complaints by one Shri. Jolbahar Ali
and Shri. Ashraf Ali, were withdrawn, and that the letters from the
Gaonbura and the Headman indicates that the meeting was genuine and
that the same was held on 14-11-2021, at the School premises along with
the Parents, Guardians, Goanbura and the Headmaster. He therefore,
submits that on the complaint, due enquiry having been gone into, and no
irregularity or illegality being found, the approval was granted. He
therefore, submits that the writ petition is without merit and is liable to be
dismissed. Before closing his submissions, learned GA also submits that
the identity of the writ petitioners is also in doubt, as their names in the
complaint and in the impugned resolution, does not seem to match.
Another submission which has been advanced is that, it has not been
verified whether the writ petitioners are at all parents/representatives in the
said Sponsoring Body.
7. Mr. S.A.Sheikh, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5 has
supported the submission of the learned GA, and submits that the meeting
was proper and above board, and that the Managing Committee had been
duly constituted and approved as per law.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
9. It is noted at the outset that the issues raised herein, are issues of
disputed facts, as the main ground set up is with regard to the meeting
dated 14-11-2021, in which the writ petitioners allege they were not part
of, which however, has been controverted by the respondents by indicating
that the signature of the writ petitioners appears in the attendance sheet. It
is further noted that on the basis of whatever complaint that had been filed
before the respondent No. 3, the same had been attended to, and on the
basis of the said enquiry, it was found that the meeting dated 14-11-2021
had indeed happened. Another point that cannot be ignored, is that apart
from the allegations made in the writ petition, and on the basis of the
complaint filed before the respondent No. 3, the writ petitioners if at all
aggrieved with the actions of the respondent Nos. 4 & 5, especially with
the accusation of forgery of their names, should have instituted criminal
proceedings which however, was not done.
10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein it is
impossible for a Court sitting in writ jurisdiction to discern the disputed
facts as put forward and moreover, as the term of the present Managing
Committee is to expire in November, 2024, no case is made out for any
interference at this stage.
11. It is however provided that, in such reconstitution of Managing
Committees, due process should be adopted by the outgoing Managing
Committees, in ensuring proper notice and participation of all the stake
holders of the Sponsoring Body so that the students for which the Schools
are to cater to, do no suffer due to such infighting and conflicts.
12. Accordingly, writ petition stands closed and disposed of.
Judge
Meghalaya
30.05.2024
"Samantha PS"
