AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Ms. D. Lyngdoh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Mr. P. Nongbri, learned GA appearing on behalf of
the State respondents No. 1 & 2, Mr. A. Khan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 3 & 4 and Mr. K. Paul, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the Pro-forma respondents No. 5 & 6.
.The brief fact of the petitioner''s case in a nutshell is that:
The Khasi Hills Archery Sports Institute (KHASI) is a registered institute registered with the Registrar of Societies, Meghalaya,
Shillong. KHASI has been issued the Licensed Permit for organizing the game of Arrow-shooting at Shillong since 29/04/1983 and
has been doing so with due diligence so that the game of Arrow-shooting is fair and proper. Apart from KHASI there are 3(three)
associations viz., Meghalaya Thoh Team Welfare Association (MATTWA), Khasi Hills Bookies Welfare Association (KHBWA)
and Meghalaya Book Maker''s Welfare Union (MBMWU) who took part in the daily game of Arrow-shooting at Shillong. These
3(three) associations look after the welfare of the licensed bookies at Shillong. However, out of these 3(three) associations one of the
association i.e. Meghalaya Book Maker''s Welfare Union (MBMWU) had internal differences among its members since the month of
January, 2016. There are 2(two) factions within MBMWU, one faction is led by Shri. Armstrong Syiem and the other faction is led
by Shri. Stondarly R. Lyngkhoi. Due to their differences on 08/03/2016 there was a quarrel between the said two factions of
MBMWU, due to which the KHASI had to intervene and allot 3 shooters to one faction and 5 shooters to the other faction. As per
Rule 42(2) of the Meghalaya Amusements and Betting Tax (Amendment) Rules, 1982 and Condition No. 6 of the License Permit
issued to KHASI the total number of shooters should not be less than 30 or more than 50. So it was unanimously decided by
KHASI and the other 3 associations that each association will get 8 shooters each and KHASI which has 12 (twelve) clubs under its
umbrella will keep the remaining 26 shooters. Then again on 09/03/2016 another quarrel broke out between the 2(two) factions of
MBMWU and both factions wanted 8(eight) shooters of their own to take part in the game of arrow-shooting. If that were allowed
to happen then the number of shooters would be 58 in total which is against the Rules as such KHASI being the Organizers decided
to suspend MBMWU to take part in the game of Arrow-shooting with effect from 09/03/2016 and gave them 40(forty) days time to
settle their internal differences. Instead of trying to settle their differences both factions filed F.I.Rs against each other as a result of
which 2 cases were registered with the Sadar Police Station. Thereafter, both the factions sought for more time from KHASI to settle
their matter and the KHASI was pleased to give 15(fifteen) days more time to them with a condition that no more time would be
given to them in future. However, even after the additional 15 days time was given to MBMWU they were unable to settle their
internal matters. As a result, KHASI held a meeting on 17/05/2016 and decided to make the temporary suspension of MBMWU
permanent and absolute. In the said meeting a lot of grounds were brought forward as to why the MBMWU should be expelled from
the game of Arrow-shooting. The matter regarding the expulsion of MBMWU was informed to both factions of MBMWU and the
Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 19/05/2016. Thereafter, a meeting was held between KHASI and the remaining 2(two)
associations on 20/05/2016 to discuss regarding the division of the 8(eight) shooters of MBMWU and it was unanimously decided
that the 2(two) associations viz., MATTWA and KHBWA would get 2 shooters each and KHASI would retain the remaining 4
shooters. Thereafter, the KHASI received a letter dated 09/06/2016 from the Respondent No. 1 requesting the KHASI to revoke
the suspension of MBMWU from the daily game of arrow-shooting and to allow their shooters to take part in the daily games. The
KHASI replied through letter dated 13/06/2016 that the request of the Respondent No. 1 would make the KHASI break the Rule
42(2) of the Meghalaya Amusement and Betting Tax (Amendment) Rules, 1982 as well as Condition No. 6 of their License Permit
and as such sought clarification from the Respondent No. 1 as to how to go about the problem. It may be mentioned herein that the
Respondent No. 1 has sent the letter dated 09/06/2016 to the KHASI on the basis of the letter dated 07/03/2016 forwarded by the
Respondent No. 2 to the Respondent No. 1. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 1 issued the impugned letter/Order dated 23/06/2016
whereby the KHASI was directed to revoke the suspension of MBMWU with immediate effect and to allow the shooters of
MBMWU to take part in the game of Arrow-shooting. It was even stated therein that the said direction was bounded upon KHASI
as per Condition No. 11 of the License Permit. The petitioners have approached this Hon''ble Court against the impugned
letter/Order issued to it by the Respondent No. 1.
After going through this instant writ petition and after hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
considered view that the writ Court has a very limited role. In fact, I am of the view that the writ Court has no scope to pass any kind of order in
the instant case. The jurisdiction of writ requires to be invoked with utmost caution and not on unnecessary grounds.
As per the impugned order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the Government of Meghalaya annexed at Annexure-20 Page 56 of the writ petition, it
appears that the Government has already taken steps to settle the matter. Therefore, I feel this Court has nothing much to add and it will also not
be wise to interfere. Hence, I am of the opinion that this matter is without jurisdiction of the writ Court; however all the parties are directed to settle
their dispute and comply with the impugned order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the Government annexed at Annexure-20 Page 56 of the writ
petition. It is also further directed that no one should create any law and order problem.
With this observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of.