MEGHALAYA POWER DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LIMITED (MePDCL) v. DARREN DAMANBHA KHARKONGOR AND ANR.
WA/87/2024 · 2026-02-11
Revati Mohite Dere, W Diengdoh
body2024
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 34 (MEG) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 34 (MEG) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
WA No.87/2024 Date of Order: 11.02.2026
Meghalaya Power Distribution Corporation Limited (MePDCL), through the Chief Engineer, Meghalaya Power Distribution Corporation Limited (MePDCL), Short Round Road, Lumjingshai, Shillong-793001, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ..... Appellant
Vs.
1. Darren Damanbha Kharkongor
2. Bansharailang Kharkongor
Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance: For the Appellant: Mr. A.S. Pandey, GA with
Ms. R. Colney, GA
For the Respondents: Mr. S. Jindal, Adv with
Ms. A. Nongbri, Adv for R/1&2
Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with
Ms. S Kh Nongrum, GA for the State
JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By the aforesaid appeal, the appellant has impugned the judgment and order dated 28th August, 2024, passed by the learned Single Judge, by which the learned Single Serial No.01 Supplementary List 2026:MLHC:73-DB
Judge, after hearing the parties, directed the appellant- authority to consider the case of the petitioners within four months. The petition preferred by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 was accordingly allowed and disposed of.
3. The learned Single Judge has only directed the appellant to consider the case of the petitioners within four months from the date of receipt of the order. According to the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, the aforesaid appeal is premature, inasmuch as, the direction is only to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the observations made by the learned Single Judge.
4.
Learned counsel for the appellant on instructions submits that the respondents will consider the case of the petitioners expeditiously, however, this Court may observe that the issue whether the Office Memorandum issued by the Government of Meghalaya dated 30th August, 2017, is applicable to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be kept open, having regard to the documents submitted for the first 2026:MLHC:73-DB
time by the appellant with their affidavit and additional affidavit.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid appeal is premature, inasmuch as the learned Single Judge has only directed the appellant-authority to consider the case of the petitioners.
6. Needless to state, that the appellant-authority to consider the case of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on its own merits in accordance with law. The issue with respect to applicability of the Office Memorandum dated 30th August, 2017 is kept open, having regard to the fact, that some new documents have been filed on record by the appellant, by way of an affidavit and additional affidavit which were not placed before the learned Single Judge. All
contentions of all parties on merits are kept open.
2026:MLHC:73-DB
7. The direction given by the learned Single Judge to consider the petitioners’ case to be decided by the appellant-authority within six weeks from today.
8. The appeal is disposed of on the above terms.
(W. Diengdoh) (Revati Mohite Dere) Judge Chief Justice
Meghalaya 11.02.2026
“Lam DR-PS”
2026:MLHC:73-DB Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2026.02.13 12:59:45 IST