TENNYDARD M. MARAK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS prayed for by the parties, the present writ petition (PIL) is taken up for deciding the preliminary issue as to whether the present writ petition in the form of PIL is maintainable or not. For deciding the maintainability of the present writ petition in the form of PIL, this Court is called for to decide the two core questions: -

(2.) HEARD Mr. OP Bhati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. KS Kynjing, learned Advocate General, Megh -alaya assisted by Mr. ND Chullai, learned Sr. GA for the State respondents.

(3.) IT is the pleaded case of the petitioner that the Garo (Scheduled Tribe) society follows matrilineal system and the descent is always traced and accorded through mother alone. Being so, in a Garo family, the children belong to mother's clan. For instance, if a mother belongs to a Sangma clan and the father to a Marak clan, the children all become Sangma and not Marak. As the mother of the respondent No.5 was a Muslim by faith and non - Garo, who hailed from Nagoan in the State of Assam, the respondent No.5 could not be a member of the Scheduled Tribe "Garo" according to the customs and usages prevalent in the Garo society. On the strength of such certificate (Scheduled Tribe certificate) that the respondent No.5 is a member of the Scheduled Tribe community or Sangma clan, he not only enrolled as a voter belonging to the tribal (Scheduled Tribe) but also contested the elections to the Megha -laya Legislative Assembly from Ampatigiri (a reserved Constituency for Scheduled Tribes) in the years 1993, 1998, 2003, 2008 and 2013 respectively and now he has become the Chief Minister of Meghalaya. Since, the caste certificate (Sic S.T. Certificate)issued is not a valid one for the reasons alluded above, the election of the respondent No.5 to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly from a reserved constituency was/is void -ab -initio.