AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. S. Jindal, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. P.S. Nongbri, learned Standing counsel for the respondents No. 1 &
2/KHADC and Mr. K. Paul, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
The brief fact of the petitioner''s case in a nutshell is that:
The Writ Petitioner purchased a piece of property through a sale deed dated 27.06.1938 and this was registered with the Sub-
registrar, Shillong. The said property was purchased in 1938 with the intention of establish a golf course on it and the said property
now forms part of the golf course in Shillong, which is a major sporting and tourist attraction for the people of the city.
On 25.02.2015, the Respondent No. 3 issued a notice (Annexure-2 of W.P.) to the Writ Petitioner indicating their intention to
conduct land measurement over the property in question. This was unwarranted and illegal, since the Writ Petitioners were in
possession of the property and the Respondent No. 3 had no authority to do so. Upon objection being raised by the Writ Petitioners
(Annexure-3 of the W.P.), no measurements etc were conducted by the Respondent No. 3.
However, the Respondent No. 3 trespassed into the property on 10.05.2015 and erected an illegal signboard which stated ""Private
Property of Rumnong Family Golf Link Mawpun"". This was reported to the police vide FIR dated 11.05.2015 and 22.05.2015
(Annexure 4 and 5 of W.P.). Proceedings under Section 107/145 IPC were also sought to be drawn up by the L''d Executive
Magistrate on the basis of these FIRs (Annexure 6 of W.P.).
Not having managed to achieve their ulterior motives, it subsequently transpired that the Respondent No. 3 had approached the
Respondent Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) by way of filing a purported petition/complaint, copy of which has
not yet been received by the Writ Petitioners till date. This resulted in the Respondent KHADC issuing multiple letters to the Writ
Petitioners (Annexure 8, 9, 10 & 12 of W.P.), illegally calling for a meeting to discuss the issue and instructing the Writ Petitioners to
bring all connected documents. Even though the Respondent KHADC did not have any statutory authority to initiate proceedings of
this nature, the Writ Petitioners wrote back to the KHADC (Annexure 11 & 13 of W.P.) asking for a copy of the said
petition/complaint filed by Respondent No. 3 to be first supplied so as to better understand the exact nature of the issue/allegation.
No such copy was ever supplied to the Writ Petitioners but the KHADC continued to call for these illegal meetings. The last of these
meetings was called for on 30.09.2016 and the communication in this respect was received by the Writ Petitioners only sometime on
27/28th September 2016 (Annexure 14). Due to the unavailability of the concerned Director and due to the shortage of time, no
reply could be sent by the Writ Petitioners.
All of this culminated in the passing of the impugned order dated 30.09.2016 by the Executive Member i/c Land etc of the KHADC
(Annexure 15 of W.P.), whereby the Inspector of Mines and Minerals and the Supervisor, Land Survey, KHADC, were directed to
cause a spot inspection on the land in question on 18.11.2016 and to submit a comprehensive report at the earliest.
The Writ Petitioners humbly point out that the proceedings conducted by the Respondent KHADC, culminating in the aforesaid order
dated 30.09.2016, are perverse, illegal and completely bereft of jurisdiction. The non-supply of the petition/complaint filed by the
Respondent No. 3 and, at the same time, repeatedly calling for meetings to discuss the same, is squarely against the basic principles
of natural justice. Further, the very entertainment by the KHADC of the petition/complaint filed by the Respondent No. 3 is highly
illegal and an exercise lacking in authority. The dispute that has apparently been agitated by the Respondent No. 3 before the
Executive Committee of the KHADC, where allegations of encroachment, etc have apparently been raised against the writ
petitioners, is one that is more properly to be adjudicated by a civil court of competent jurisdiction and not by the Executive
Committee of the KHADC exercising its executive powers. No statutory/legal basis exists for the Executive Committee of the
KHADC to have entertained the petition/complaint filed by the Respondent No. 3 and there exists no basis for the order dated
30.09.2016 to have been passed, calling for an inspection of the land in question and report to be submitted upon such inspection.
No such authority exists that enables the Executive Committee of the KHADC to adjudicate/entertain private property disputes
between private parties. Therefore, the entire process undertaken by the KHADC, including the issuance of the order dated
30.09.2016, is dehors any authority of law and is liable to be interfered with and set aside.
Thus this Writ Petition has been field invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Hon''ble High Court.
Ms. P.S. Nongbri, learned Standing counsel for the respondents No. 1 & 2/KHADC filed an additional affidavit, wherein it is categorically
mentioned in Para 3 of the said affidavit that the KHADC had no intention to adjudicate the matter, but had just taken up the role as mediator to
maintain good will between the disputing parties. Since the learned Standing counsel for the respondents No. 1 & 2/KHADC admitted that she is
not going to adjudicate the matter, thereafter if the parties have any grievances, they can approach the appropriate forum to settle the dispute
amongst themselves.
With this observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of.
No order as to costs.