Meghalaya High Court
WP(C)/540/2025 of MONOWARA BEGUM Vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 9 ORS. on 20 May 2026
Serial No. 72 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 540 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.05.2026 Smti Monowara Begum, @ Monowara Bibi, W/o Shri Amir Hussain, R/o 32, Nayagaon (Bhaitbari) P/s- Phulbari West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State of
Serial No. 72
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 540 of 2025
Date of Decision: 20.05.2026
Smti Monowara Begum,
@ Monowara Bibi,
W/o Shri Amir Hussain,
R/o 32, Nayagaon (Bhaitbari) P/s- Phulbari West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya … Petitioner(s)
Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. State of Meghalaya represented by The Chief Secretary of Meghalaya
2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Community & Rural Development Department, Meghalaya
3. The Mission Director, State Rural Employment Society, Sympli Building, Dhankheti,, Shillong, Meghalaya
4. The Deputy Commissioner & District Programme Coordinator, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
5. The Project Director & Additional Programme Coordinator, (MGNREGS), West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
6. The Block Development Officer, (B.D.O) & Programme Officer (MGNREGS), Batabari C&RD Block, Batabari, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
7. The Block Development Officer, (B.D.O) & Programme Officer (MGNREGS), Demdema C&RD Block, Demdema West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
8. Smti Zahenara Bibi, W/o Shri Mobobot Ali, R/o Nayagaon (Bhaitbari), P.O- Old Bhaitbari West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
9. Smti Nargis Begum, W/o Shri Mostafizur Rahman R/o Nayagaon (Bhaitbari), P.O- Old Bhaitbari West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya
10. Smti Mozma Bibi @ Mojema Bibi, W/o Shri Osial Sk R/o Nayagaon (Bhaitbari), P.O- Old Bhaitbari West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya … Respondent(s)
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner (s) : Ms. M.L. Tlau, Adv. with
Mr. R.H. Alice
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. E.R. Chyne, GA (For R 1-7)
Mr. S.K. Hassan, Adv. with
Ms. M. Rahman, Adv. (For R 8-10 __________________________________________________________ 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 grievance of the writ petitioner is that though she was duly elected as President of Nayagaon (Bhaitbari) VEC, West Garo Hills,
Tura vide elections that were held on 06.06.2023, and that without any notice or complaint whatsoever, she was summarily removed on the re- constitution of the new VEC on 24.03.2025.
2. Ms. M.L. Tlau, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have acted arbitrarily and that moreover no such election was held on 24.03.2025, as alleged in view of the fact that the Headman was not present and that his signature was forged. She further submits that as the manner of the re-constitution the VEC is under a cloud, appropriate directions be issued for re-constitution of Nayagaon (Bhaitbari) VEC, by holding fresh elections involving all valid job card holders.
3. Mr. E.R. Chyne, learned GA for the respondents Nos. 1 to 7, has submitted that the Gaonbura certificate of not being present on 24.03.2025 stands disowned and suppressed by subsequent clarifications, and that the writ petitioner has failed to disclose the valid proceedings held on 24.03.2025. The learned GA has drawn the attention of this Court to a clarification letter dated 07.11.2025, issued by the Gaonbura, to substantiate his submission.
4. Mr. S.K. Hassan, learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 8, 9 & 10, has submitted that on the resignation of the Secretary of the earlier VEC, the new VEC was re-constituted with the respondents Nos. 8, 9 &
10, as President, Secretary and Women Member respectively. He further submits that the matter in fact has since rendered infructuous in view of the fact that the new VEC is functioning since 24.03.2025.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It appears that the dispute centers around as to whether the elections held on 24.03.2025 for the new VEC, were valid in nature. Added to this, the fact that the writ petitioner’s term as President, even if serving would end or expire on 06.06.2026, cannot be ignored. Taking these two facts into consideration and looking into the disputed questions that have arisen with regard to the holding of elections to the VEC, this Court does not deem it fit to issue any directions for interference, but only that the respondent No. 6, if required shall receive complaints with regard to the functioning of the VEC, and to institute necessary action, if deemed necessary.
6. On these observations, the matter stands closed and disposed of. JUDGE
Meghalaya 20.05.2026 “V. Lyndem-PS”
Digitally signed by VALENTINO LYNDEM Date: 2026.05.20 19:27:35 IST Signature Not Verified