Kangse R Marak & Anr vs G.H.A.D.C. & Ors

1) The pleaded case of the petitioners are that they are sisters and nieces of the last undisputed Nokma (L) Thaje Marak Mechik and (L) Kaman Sangma Measa in respect of the Akhing known as Wakso IV 51 (A) belonging to Rangso clan. Further case is that as the petitioner was a minor at that point of time, the clan people appointed the respondent No. 4 as the Nokma of the said Akhing. In the year 2007 the Chra of the Akhing namely Shri Kewin R. Marak applied for registering the name of the elected Nokma, which was objected to by the petitioner. However, due to non-appearance of the petitioner in the proceedings, the matter was decided exparte by order dated 12th June, 2007, by the Executive Member i/c Land & Revenue. G.H.A.D.C. and the respondent No. 4 was recorded as the registered Nokma. Though this order was rendered on 12th June, 2007 the petitioner herein preferred an appeal only on 3rd October, 2007 before the Chief Executive Member, G.H.A.D.C. Tura against the said order.

2) It seems before this forum also, the petitioner herein failed to contest the case and as per the findings of the learned Chief Executive Member, the absence was without any sufficient cause. The appeal was thus dismissed by order dated 12th March, 2010. Thereafter, on an order being passed by the Executive Member, I/c Land & Revenue, G.H.A.D.C. dated 6th December, 2016 registering the daughter of the respondent No. 4 as the new Nokma, the petitioner is before this Court assailing the entire proceedings i.e. the order dated 12th June, 2007 passed by the Executive Member i/c Land & Revenue. G.H.A.D.C, order dated 12th March, 2010 passed by the Chief Executive Member, G.H.A.D.C. and order dated 6th December, 2016 passed by the Executive Member i/c Land & Revenue. G.H.A.D.C.

3) I have heard learned counsel for the parties present. Though notice was served on respondents Nos. 4,5 and 6, no appearance has been made on their behalf.

4) Mr. A.G. Momin, learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously argued that the petitioner being an illiterate lady had relied upon her counsel and was not aware that the matter in both the forums i.e. before the Executive Member i/c Land & Revenue. G.H.A.D.C and before the Chief Executive Member, G.H.A.D.C. had been unrepresented till after the orders were passed. He submits that he was unaware that the appeal had been disposed as far back as on 2010 and it was only after the issuance of the order dated 6th December, 2016 that petitioner learned about the same. His limited prayer before this Court is only that he at least be given a chance to be heard.

5) Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 submits that the writ petition has no merit and should be dismissed in limine, inasmuch as, the latches and lapses of the petitioner cannot be condoned. He draws the Court's attention firstly to the fact that the appeal filed against the order of the Executive Member i/c Land & Revenue. G.H.A.D.C. was barred by limitation, inasmuch as, Section 8 (2) of the Garo Hills Autonomous District (Social Customs and Usages) Validating Act, 1958 stipulates that any person aggrieved by the order of the Revenue Member may prefer an appeal to the Chief Executive Member within 60 days. He next submits that after the appellate order was passed as far back to 12th March, 2010, the writ petitioner has come before this Court by way of the instant writ petition only on 31st May, 2017. He finally submits that the entire matter being hopelessly delayed without any sufficient cause or explanation, there is no cause for interference by this Court.

6) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case and the reasons which have been ascribed by the petitioner to explain the latches and lapses. Normally, petitions like these would not be entertained and would deserve no consideration. However, in the instant case considering the situation of the petitioner who is illiterate, and in the interest of justice, in spite of the fact that much time has elapsed since passing of the impugned orders, the writ petitioner is permitted to go before the Chief Executive Member, G.H.A.D.C. by way of an application seeking condonation for the long delay and seek for recall of the order dated 12th March 2010 for re hearing of the appeal. The Chief Executive Member in his discretion shall examine the same on its merit and pass orders thereon. It is made clear that the impugned orders herein shall not be disturbed till the proceedings are finally concluded. It is further made clear that this case will not serve as a precedent in other similar matters.

7) With the following directions, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.