AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Misc. Application for leave to review has been filed by one Shri. Sappar Ch. Marak, who admittedly was not a party to the proceedings of WP(C) No. 160 of 2025. The order sought for review is dated 20.03.2026, passed in MC (WPC) No. 50 of 2026, whereby this Court had taken up the Misc. Application filed jointly by the petitioner and the respondent No. 5, which brought on record that the matter has since been resolved by way of an amicable settlement, which was reduced to writing, and the same had also been notarized. The said Settlement Deed was also appended to the Misc. Application.
Mr. A. G. Momin, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant submits that the Review Petitioner is an interested party, and had not been arrayed as party respondent, and was not aware about the writ petition pending, or the Deed of Settlement arrived at. The learned counsel further submits that the subject matter in issue is also seized by the Deputy CEM, GHADC-REV No. 4 A.C of 2025, and as such, he prays that leave to file a review be allowed, so that he be heard.
Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the District Council respondents however, has submitted that the settlement arrived at, was not under orders or directions of this Court, and the same had been arrived at an out of Court independently by the petitioner and the respondents No. 4 and 5 in the writ petition.
Mr. P.T. Sangma, learned counsel appearing for the erstwhile petitioner and Mr. J.M. Sangma, learned counsel appearing for the erstwhile respondents No. 4 and 5 submit that the agreement reached was amicable, and further all the opposing counsels submit that the settlement is not under challenge, and as such, notwithstanding any orders allowing leave to file a review, the same will have no effect on the settlement arrived at.
This Court on considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and though noting the fact that the Review Petitioner was not party to the proceedings, but as the settlement has been arrived at independently out of Court, allowing the leave to file a Review Application will be but a futile exercise.
The Review Petitioner is however, at liberty to approach the competent authority, to assail the Settlement Deed in the pending proceedings, which he alleges concerns the same subject matter in dispute.
Misc. Application accordingly stands closed and disposed of.