High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 MEG CK 1315

Smti. Disaka Elliotte Laloo vs Meghalaya Public Service Commission

Meghalaya High Court · Decided on 24 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
B. Bhattacharjee, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
WP(C) No.71 of 2020

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

7 paragraphs · 315 words

Heard Mr. Philemon Nongbri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. B.F. Kharwanlang, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 – 2 and also Ms. R. Colney, learned GA appearing for the State-respondent No.3.

By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Notification No. MPSC/Ex-C/37/2016-2017/12 dated 06.04.2017, letter under Memo No. MPSC/Ex-C/37/2016-17/20 dated 26.05.2017, letter under Memo No. MPSC D-4/4/2015-2016/88 dated 26.05.2017 and Order No. MPSC/Ex-C/37/2016-17/18 dated 24.05.2017 and also prayed for a direction for issuance of requisite appointment order to the petitioner for appointment in the post of Ayurvedic Physician in the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Meghalaya.

Mr. Philemon Nongbri, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that in view of the long pendency of the matter, the petitioner would not like to press this writ petition insofar as her claim of appointment to the post of Ayurvedic Physician is concerned. He, however, submits that initiation of the enquiry and passing of the order dated 10.05.2017 may have the effect of casting stigma on the petitioner. He, therefore, prays that some orders may be passed so that no stigma is attached to the petitioner.

Ms. B.F. Kharwanlang, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 – 2/MPSC, on the other hand, submits that the subsequent order No.MPSC/Ex-C/37/2016-17/19 dated 25.05.2017 makes it amply clear that the procedure prescribed therein is applicable to recruitment/selection for all types of posts and hence, the question of attaching any stigma on the petitioner does not arise.

Ms. R. Colney, learned GA submits that State-respondent has no role to play in the matter.

In view of the submissions made by the parties, this writ petition stands closed on withdrawal with an observation that the order dated 10.05.2017 (Annexure-15 of the writ petition) shall not be construed as an order casting stigma on the petitioner.

With the above, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.