HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG PIL No. 6 of 2024 Date of order: 10.06.2025 Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya, Shillong. …Petitioner - versus - State of Meghalaya represented by the Chief Secretary, government of Meghalaya …Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice I.P. Mukerji, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. P. Yobin, Amicus Curiae For the Respondent : Mr. A. H. Kharwanlang, Addl. Sr. GA Mr. J.N. Rynjah, GA Mr. K.V. Kharlyngdoh, Adv. i) Whether approved for Yes/No reporting in Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: Note: For proper public information and transparency, any media reporting this judgment is directed to mention the composition of the bench by name of judges, while reporting this judgment/order. ORDER: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral) We have gone through the records of this public interest litigation before this Court. We have also gone through the records of the case before the National Green Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi. Serial No. 01 Daily List The petitioner is represented by learned counsel here. The petitioner, according to the records has been all along unrepresented before the Tribunal. By our order dated 24th March, 2025, we had observed that two parallel proceedings could not go on before this Court and the Tribunal and directed the petitioner, Mr. Khroo L. Pariat to file an affidavit by 4th April, 2025 explaining the situation. An affidavit has been filed as directed. On the basis of the said affidavit, learned counsel representing the petitioner drew our attention to his client’s undated letter to “The Hon’ble Chief Justice, the High Court of Meghalaya, Shillong” containing the cause of action on which this public interest litigation was started suo motu by this Court. He showed us the foot of the letter where it was stated that a copy was being forwarded to the Hon’ble Chairman National Green Tribunal, New Delhi. He submitted and in our opinion most correctly that the grievance was addressed to the High Court and only information thereof was sent to the Tribunal. Be that as it may, on the basis of this copy, after proceedings in the High Court had been commenced, the Tribunal has initiated proceedings, also suo motu. Now, it appears from the recent records after our order dated 24th March, 2025 that these submissions which are made on behalf of the petitioner before us now were not made before the Tribunal and the Tribunal is proceeding with the matter. The petitioner is continuing not to appear before the Tribunal. The public respondents are subjecting them to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Considering all the circumstances, we are of the view that we shall not take this headache any longer. This public interest litigation is disposed of vacating all interim orders passed therein with the exception that the Amicus Curiae appointed by us, who has done substantial work and has only been paid partly, shall be paid further and final renumeration of ₹75,000/- in the same manner he was paid the initial renumeration. (W. Diengdoh) (I.P. Mukerji) Judge Chief Justice