1 Serial No. 08 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 21 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.02.2025 Shri. Kawangbor Syiemiong (Syiem of Nobosohphoh Syiemship) S/o (L) Karbingstone Kharjahrin :::Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council represented by the Executive Member, KHADC, Shillong 2.The Executive Committee, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong 3.Joint Secretary to the Executive Committee, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong 4.Shri. Hamlam Paliar Chairman Synjuk Rangbah Shnong Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship, South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya 5.Shri. Bokstone Thongni Secretary Synjuk Rangbah Shnong Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship, South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya 2025:MLHC:46 2 6. Shri. Krally Iawphniaw Vice – Chairman Synjuk Rangbah Shnong Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship, South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya 7.Shri. Ferdinand Khardewsaw Assistance Secretary Synjuk Rangbah Shnong Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship, South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya 8.Shri. Ferdinance Syiemiong Acting Syiem Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship R/o Rangblang Village South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya :::Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, Adv.(For R 1-3). i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No 2025:MLHC:46 3 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Issue notice. 3. Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, learned counsel is present and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No. 1-3. 4. As the writ petition is substantially against the official respondents, notice at this stage is not deemed necessary to the private respondents. 5. Mr. P. Yobin, conducting counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a petition dated 04.09.2024, had been filed by a group of individuals claiming themselves to be the members of the Synjuk Rangbah Shnong Hima Nobosohphoh Syiemship, wherein they have leveled baseless allegations against the writ petitioner and have prayed also for his removal from office. He submits that the respondent No. 2, has strangely on this frivolous complaint, suspended the petitioner vide order dated 20.12.2024, without giving him an opportunity to represent against the same. He has strenuously argued that the action of the respondents which seems to be in haste, and on the basis of unverified complaints is illegal, and the same is liable to be interfered with by this Court. 6. Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 1-3 has produced an order dated 20.12.2024, with regard to the institution of 2025:MLHC:46 4 an enquiry into the complaint made against the writ petitioner. It is submitted by the learned counsel that on the complaints that has been made, the respondent No. 2 has appointed a Judicial Magistrate to enquire into the matter, and that this action has been taken as per Section 6 of the United Khasi – Jaintia: Hills Autonomous District (Appointment and Succession of Chiefs and Headman) Act, 1959, which vests the respondents No. 1-3 with the power to order for suspension pending enquiry. The learned counsel has further submitted that as the enquiry proceedings are under way, it is not a case that the writ petitioner has been dealt with unfairly, or that he has been removed from office, but that he has ample opportunity to project his own case before the Enquiry Officer. He further submits that no interference is called for and that the enquiry be allowed to proceed against the writ petitioner. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also examined the materials as placed on record. It is seen that the petitioner by the order dated 20.12.2024 has been suspended, as per Section 6 of the above aforementioned Act, and an Acting Syiem appointed in his place. Futher, from the letter produced by the learned counsel for the respondents No. 1-3, it is also seen that the Magistrate First Class, South West Khasi Hills has been appointed as an Enquiry Officer to go into the complaints against the writ petitioner. 2025:MLHC:46 5 8. In this view of the matter, as the procedure adopted is in accordance with the provisions of 1959 Act, no interference is called for with regard to the suspension order. 9. It is further noted that as the period allowed to the Enquiry Officer 6(six) months from 20.12.2024, it is expected that the enquiry be completed well within that time, by affording adequate opportunity to the writ petitioner to present his case. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition under terms of the direction stated above stands closed and disposed of. 11. It is expected that all parties to cooperate with the enquiry. Judge Meghalaya 10.02.2025 “D.Thabah-PS” 2025:MLHC:46 Digitally signed by DARIHUN THABAH Date: 2025.02.10 16:43:39 IST