Serial No. 17 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 337 of 2026 Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 1.Smti Clarissa Jordana Sohtun 2.Smti Shaiti Syiemlieh. 3.Smti Dira Lyngkhoi 4.Smti Magrita Nongrum 5.Smti Ryngkatlang Shylla 6.Smti Ibandarishisha Bani 7.Shri Skandin Kharshiing, 8.Smti Roi Sohtun 9.Smti Shmidalin Khongsit 10.Smti Trilinda Sahbong 11.Smti Bilinda Hujon 12.Smti Trenita N. Marak. 13.Smti Ritha Sangma 14. Shri John Robert Kharkrang 15. Smti Taralin Marwein, 16.Iulis Marbaniang 17.Smti Phrinda Suting 18.Smti Belin Marbaniang 19.Smti Pdiangsuklang Wahlang 20.Smti Swiansina Kharsyntiew 21.Shri Seningstar Kharhunai 22.Shri Dolar Thongni 23.Smti Mesina Khyllait 24.Shri Robasstar Kurbah 25.Smti Damary Sohtun 26.Smti Sharailin Jyrwa 27.Smti Melinda Hashah 28.Shri Bankersharai Sohtun 29.Shri Ebenezer Warjri 2026:MLHC:766 30.Smti Sarlin Marwein 31.Smti Makrisha Kharkongor 32.Smti Kyntiewbhalin Lyngdoh. 33.Shri Banteilang L. Khingsngi 34. Shri Rangdajied Nongrum 35. Smti Dephina Marwein … Petitioner(s) Versus 1.State of Meghalaya represented by The Chief Secretary, Government of Meghalaya. 2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Urban Affairs Department, Government of Meghalaya, Shillong. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, Meghalaya 4. The Shillong Municipal Board represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Shillong 5. The Superintendent of Police, East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya 6. The Town Vending Committee, (TVC) Shillong, East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya … Respondent(s) Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.F. Qureshi, Adv. with Mr. L. Koch, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Dey, Adv. (For R 4) 2026:MLHC:766 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. The petitioners herein who claim to be roadside vendors in the stretch from Jail Road to Polo Towers have prayed for restraining orders against their removal by the authorities. 2. Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel who is present on behalf of the Shillong Municipal Board (respondent No. 4), submits that the matter concerning the vendors is substantially before the Division Bench of this Court, and that the petitioners may file appropriate applications before the said Division Bench. 3. Mr. M.F. Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioners has however resisted the suggestion of the learned counsel for the respondent No. 4, and submits that the vendors in question are on a different footing, and prays for some protection. 4. This Court on hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on examination of the materials available notes that the petitioners apart from claiming to be the roadside vendors in the said stretch have not annexed any materials to substantiate their case. 2026:MLHC:766 5. Be that as it may, as the matter concerns roadside vendors, where the same issue is pending consideration before a Division Bench of this Court, this writ petition is not entertained and the same is disposed of by allowing the petitioners the liberty to put in appropriate applications in the main matter, pending before the Division Bench, if so advised. 6. As ordered above, the matter stands closed and is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Meghalaya 27.07.2026 “V. Lyndem-AR-PS” 2026:MLHC:766 Digitally signed by VALENTINO LYNDEM Date: 2026.07.28 14:06:18 IST