1 Serial No.04 Supp. List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C). No. 146 of 2025 Date of Decision : 30.04.2025 Shri. Bashemphang Thabah. …Petitioner -Versus- 1. Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Represented by the Deputy Secretary, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council. 2. Executive Committee, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Represented by Secretary to the Executive Committee, K.H.A.D.C. 3. Executive Member I/c, Elaka Administration etc., Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong. 4. Joint Secretary to the Executive Committee, K.H.A.D.C, Shillong. 5. Deputy Secretary to the Executive Committee, K.H.A.D.C, Shillong. …Respondents 2025:MLHC:333 2 Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. R.Kharkrang, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Ms. P.S.Nongbri, Adv. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard Mr. R.Kharkrang, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Ms. P.S.Nongbri, learned counsel is present on behalf of all the respondents, as such no further notice is called for. 3. The petitioner before this Court is the erstwhile Lyngdoh of Sohiong. His grievance is that an inquiry which was instituted against him by the Executive Committee, KHADC respondent No. 2, has resulted in his being removed from the office by an order dated 19-06-2024, which was communicated to him on 17-09-2024. 4. Mr. R.Kharkrang, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was allowed an opportunity to participate in the 2025:MLHC:333 3 proceedings, however, the impugned order had been passed without furnishing the inquiry report to him. He submits that the non-furnishing of the inquiry report has vitiated the entire process. 5. Ms. P.S.Nongbri, learned counsel on behalf of all the respondents has submitted that it is a fact that the inquiry report was not furnished to the writ petitioner. She prays that as the grievance of the writ petitioner is only against the non-supply of a copy of the inquiry report, the respondents are agreeable to furnish a copy to the writ petitioner within one week. She further prays that as the prayer is limited to only this issue, the matter may be closed. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. From the submissions, it is undisputed that the petitioner was never afforded with a copy of the inquiry report on the basis of which his removal had been ordered. However, as the learned counsel for the respondents has undertaken to supply a copy of the same within one week, this writ petition is therefore closed with a direction that a copy of the inquiry report be duly furnished to the writ petitioner as per undertaking. 7. Matter accordingly stands closed and disposed of. Judge 2025:MLHC:333 4 2025:MLHC:333 Digitally signed by SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA RYNJAH Date: 2025.04.30 04:28:15 IST