High CourtsSingle Bench(2017) 02 MEG CK 0027

Shri Erajul Islam vs State of Meghalaya and Others

Meghalaya High Court · Decided on 22 February 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dinesh Maheshwari
CASE NUMBER
22 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 324 words
1.

In view of the limited prayer made, this petition is taken up for final disposal at this stage itself.

2.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that himself and some other Head Teachers of different schools of Konarchar CRC under Selsella,

BRC, SSA, West Garo Hills, Tura had submitted complaints against the functioning of respondent No. 7 but by the orders dated 24.01.2017 and

30.01.2017, the respondents No. 7 has been reinstated and has been allowed to function as such, which has led to serious questions and disputes.

It is contended that the petitioner and the other complainants have filed an appeal against the order dated 24.01.2017 before the State Project

Director, SSA, Meghalaya, Shillong (respondent No. 2) on 31.01.2017 and the said appeal is required to be taken up for disposal at the earliest

in the interest of the schools and the project of SSA. It is, therefore, prayed that appropriate directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of

the appeal by respondent No. 2.

3.

The learned Government Advocate, Mr. K. Khan appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 6 has no objection if such directions are issued for

expeditious disposal of the appeal. Similarly, the learned counsel, Ms. A. Agarwal appearing for respondent No. 7 has not opposed the prayer

that the said appeal be disposed of expeditiously.

4.

Looking to the submissions made and in the totality of circumstances, it is considered appropriate and hence directed that the pending appeal

shall be taken up for consideration by respondent No. 2 in priority and shall be disposed of at the earliest, preferably within thirty days from the

date of appearance of the parties. For the purpose of requirement of this order, the petitioner as also respondent No. 7 are directed to remain

present before the respondent No. 2 on 03.03.2017.

5.

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

6.

MC [WP(C)] No. 6 of 2017 also stands disposed of.