Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Meghalaya · body

2026 DAILYLAW 336 (MEG)

ST. EDMUNDS SCHOOL AND ANR. v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ANR

WA/22/2026 · 2026-06-09

B Bhattacharjee, Revati Mohite Dere

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WA No.22/2026 Date of Order: 09.06.2026 1. St. Edmund’s School, Laitumkhrah, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya Shillong-793003. 2. The Principal, St. Edmund’s School, Laitumkhrah, Shillong, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ..... Appellants Vs. 1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong. 2. Smti. Deepali Patel ..... Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Appellants : Mr. K. Paul, Sr.Adv with Mr. S. Chanda, Adv For the Respondents : Mrs. T. Yangi B., AAG with Ms. R. Colney, GA Mr. S. Deb, Adv for R/2 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice): (Oral) The matter was kept today to enable the parties to draw minutes of the order. Although, learned counsel for the respective parties have tendered minutes of the order, we deem it appropriate to pass an order not in terms of the minutes of the order but as an order of the Court. Serial No.01 Supplementary List 2026:MLHC:553-DB 2. By this appeal, the appellants have impugned the judgment and order dated 22nd May, 2026, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No.84 of 2026, by which the learned Single Judge has set aside the impugned action of the appellant and allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent No.2 and as such, quashed and set aside the forfeiture/cancellation of the respondent No.2’s son admission in KG for the session 2026. 3. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the appellants have preferred the aforesaid appeal. During the pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes/issues inter se between them. 4. It appears and which fact is not disputed that pursuant to the amicable solution, the child i.e., respondent’s No.2 son has been admitted by the appellants, as a regular student of St. Edmund’s School, Shillong from 8th June, 2026. The said gesture shown by the appellants’ school has been appreciated by the respondent No.2 parents. The parents in view of the amicable settlement have tendered an unconditional apology to the school authorities and have undertaken to remove all social media posts 2026:MLHC:553-DB uploaded by them forthwith with an assurance that no further postings/comments etc. in this connection will be made i.e., the subject matter of this appeal. The respondent parents have also assured to take steps to request the concerned news agencies etc. to remove and take down all publications in connection with this incident/subject matter, keeping in mind the larger interest of the child. 5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants on instruction has also assured that the child so admitted and his parents shall be treated like any other students/parents. Learned Senior Counsel further submits on instruction that although the child has not attended the school since commencement of the school, the same shall not be an impediment for promotion of the child to the next standard i.e., Standard-1. 6. In view of the amicable settlement between the parties and without going into the merits of the impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, the said judgment and order dated 22nd May, 2026, passed in WP (C) No.84 of 2026, stands quashed and set aside. Needless to state that, with respect to the 2026:MLHC:553-DB subject petition, legal proceedings initiated by the respective parties, if any, shall be withdrawn by the respective parties. 7. Considering the nature of dispute and since a young child aged five years is involved in the same, we deem it appropriate to direct the Registry that all records, including YouTube proceedings of this Court channel, if so recorded may be kept confidential and shall not be made available for public dissemination, keeping in mind the larger interest and paramount welfare of the child. 8. The appeal is allowed and disposed of on the aforesaid terms. 9. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (B. Bhattacharjee) (Revati Mohite Dere) Judge Chief Justice Meghalaya 09.06.2026 “Lam DR-PS” 2026:MLHC:553-DB Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2026.06.09 18:34:37 IST