Phrident Singh Thabah vs State Of Meghalaya & Ors

H.S. Thangkhiew, J

Heard Mr. Philemon Nongbri, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice.

Learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. J.N.Rynjah, learned GA is present for the respondents No. 1-3, as such, no further notice is called for on these respondents.

As the prayer of the writ petitioner is very limited, notice is not necessary to be issued to the remaining respondents which are the Banks.

It is submitted that the writ petitioner is aggrieved with the orders dated 11-12-2025 and 29-01-2026, where proceedings under the Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913, which had been instituted against the petitioner have been disposed of. Mr. Philemon Nongbri, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in the disposal of the said proceedings, which is stated to be the recovery of certain amounts which had been disbursed for compensation, the materials relied upon by the quasi-judicial authority, more particularly, an order dated 14-05-2025, issued by the Syiem of Mylliem, was not supplied to the petitioner. He submits that though the challenge has been made to the impugned orders, at this stage, the prayer of the petitioner is limited only to the supply of the materials which have been relied upon by the respondents while passing the said impugned orders, to enable him to take further steps in accordance with law.

Learned Advocate General on behalf of the respondents No. 1-3, has submitted that no case is made out for any interference by this Court, inasmuch as, firstly, the matter concerns disputed facts and also that the case of the writ petitioner is without any substantial basis. Learned Advocate General has taken this Court through the documents from which the entire transaction has arisen, such as, the agreement entered into by the writ petitioner and the alleged vendor of the land, which has been acquired. He therefore, submits that the very root of the matter being based on an unregistered and unconfirmed document, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed in limine.

This Court, on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, and also on examination of the materials on record, notes that the matter concerns disputed facts, apart from the avenues of alternate remedy which have been availed to by the writ petitioner. However, considering the fact that the only prayer at this stage is for supply of the documents relied upon by the authorities to come to the finding in the Recovery proceedings, this Court without entering into the merits of the matter, directs that the order dated 14-05-2025, issued by the Syiem of Mylliem be made available to the writ petitioner, to enable him to avail of other alternate remedy in accordance with law.

As nothing further remains for consideration presently, this writ petition is closed and disposed of.