Meghalaya High Court
WP(C)/169/2019 of U BASWELL NONGNENG SHANPRU AND 2 ORS. Vs THE KHASI HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND 4 ORS. on 13 December 2019
169 of 2019 Page 1 of 3 Serial No. 05 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 169 of 2019 Date of Order: 13.12.2019 U Baswell Nongneng Shanpru & 2 Ors. Vs. K.H.A.D.C. & Ors. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 169 of 2019
Date of Order: 13.12.2019Vs. K.H.A.D.C. & Ors.
U Baswell Nongneng Shanpru & 2 Ors.
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. S.C. Chakrawarty, Sr. Adv. with Ms. E. Slong, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, Sr. Adv. with Ms. M. Kynta, Adv. for R 1-3. Mr. Philemon Nongbri, Adv. for R 4. Mr. L. Khyriem, Adv. for R 5. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No ORAL
1. The brief facts of the present case is that the petitioners are said to be the Myntris of the Mylliem Syiemship and are also electors entitled to vote in the election of the Syiem of Mylliem in accordance with the provisions of the Khasi Hills Autonomous District (Appointment and Succession of Syiem, Deputy Syiem, Electors and Rangbah Shnong of Mylliem Syiemship) Act, 2007.
2. Vide order dated 21.04.2016, the respondent No. 4 who is the present Syiem of Mylliem was placed under suspension by the Executive Committee of the KHADC and by the same order dated 21.04.2016, Shri. Ricky Nelson Syiem was chosen to be appointed as the Acting Syiem of Hima Mylliem.
Again by the same order dated 21.04.2016, the Executive Committee has appointed Smti. S.B. Laitthma, the then Magistrate First Class, Sub-ordinate District Council Court, Khasi Hills, Shillong to conduct an enquiry into the allegations against the respondent No. 4, the present Syiem of Mylliem.
3. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 21.04.2016 (Annexure-4 of the writ petition) passed by the Executive Committee, KHADC, the respondent No. 4 had preferred a writ petition before this Court being registered as WP(C) No. 129 of 2016 and vide order dated 05.10.2016, this Court had stayed the enquiry by Smti. S.B. Laitthma.
Page 1 of 3
4. In course of the proceeding, the respondent No. 4 withdrew the said writ petition, which was allowed by this Court with liberty to file a fresh petition, if necessary.
5. Again, vide order dated 31.07.2018, the respondent No. 1-3/KHADC removed the said Shri. Ricky Nelson Syiem from the post of Acting Syiem and had appointed Shri. Ainam Manik Syiem (Respondent No. 5 herein) as the Acting Syiem of the Mylliem Syiemship.
6. Heard Mr. S.C. Chakrawarty, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. E. Slong, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners as well as Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. M. Kynta, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 1-3, Mr. Philemon Nongbri, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 4 and Mr. L. Khyriem, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 5.
7. It is the submission of the learned Sr. counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners desire that the said enquiry conducted by Smti. S.B. Laitthma be reinitiated so as to conclude the enquiry against the respondent No. 4 herein to its logical end. However, the apprehension raised by the learned Sr. counsel is that now, in view of the fact that Smti. S.B. Laitthma is no longer the Judicial Magistrate, Sub-ordinate District Council Court, Shillong, but had been promoted as the Additional Judge of the District Council Court, Shillong, therefore the enquiry could not be conducted by the learned Additional Judge of the District Council Court, Shillong.
8. Per contra, the learned Sr. counsel for the respondent No. 1-3 has submitted that there is nothing on record to indicate that the enquiry was terminated, and that Smti. S.B. Laitthma has been removed as the Enquiry Officer. The fact that the said interim order dated 05.10.2016 passed by this Court in MC[WP(C)] No. 152 of 2016 having been vacated on withdrawal of the said WP(C) No. 129 of 2016, the same will not render the said Enquiry proceedings inoperative.
9. Under the circumstances, the learned Sr. counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners will not opposed the disposal of this instant writ petition, if liberty is afforded to them to approach the Enquiry Officer, Smti. S.B. Laitthma for continuation of the said enquiry.
Page 2 of 3
10. Learned Sr. counsel for the respondent No. 1-3/KHADC has no objection to the same and that the matter is left entirely to the learned Enquiry Officer to decide on the same.
11. Learned counsels for the respondents No. 4 & 5 also concurred with the submission of the learned Sr. counsel for the respondent No. 1-3/KHADC.
12. In view of the above, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of with directions that the petitioner will approach the learned Enquiry Officer, Smti. S.B. Laitthma for necessary directions as far as the proceeding of the said enquiry initiated vide order dated 21.04.2016 is concerned.
13. No order as to costs.
Judge
Meghalaya13.12.2019
“D. Nary, PS”
WP(C) No. 169 of 2019
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…