LURSHAI IAWAPHNIAW Vs. KHASI HILLS AUTONOMOUS DIST.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are stated to be the office bearers in the dorbar of Domsynrang village which falls within two Syiemships i.e. Myriaw and Rambrai, are before this Court being aggrieved with the order of the respondent No. 2 dtd. 20/11/2024, whereby their grievances with regard to loss of confidence of the Sordar of Domsynrang village was not taken up in its true perspective.

(2.) Mr. S.M.Suna, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that various complaints have been filed against the Sordar of Domsynrang, who has been arrayed in the instant writ petition as the respondent No. 6 and that the respondent No. 2 while taking up the matter though not coming to a clear picture as to whether the respondent No. 6 still enjoys the confidence of the people, had also observed that the same could not be done only by a referendum, which however was never ordered. He further submits that the respondent No. 2 by allowing the respondent No. 6 to continue in office has caused grave injustice to the residents of Domsynrang village. He therefore prays that the order be interfered with and appropriate directions be issued by the Court.

(3.) Mr. T.T.Diengdoh, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. C.C.T.Sangma, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 1-3, has at the outset fairly submitted that the matter is a fit case for remand as prima facie the impugned order dtd. 20/11/2024 had been passed by only one Executive Member when in fact it is prescribed in the Khasi Hills Autonomous District (Appointment and Succession of Syiem, Deputy Syiem and Electors of Myriaw Syiemship), Act, 2007, at Sec. 21 thereof, that for proceedings on Executive Committee shall be by authorisation of two members who shall exercise jurisdiction on behalf of the Executive Committee. He therefore, submits that the matter can be remanded for fresh consideration by the Executive Committee.