SHRI PYRSHANG BIAM Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, said to be the Secretary of Dorbar Elaka Raliang, West Jaintia Hills District, seeks to question the validity of sub-section (2) of Sec. 3 of the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District (Establishment of Elaka and Village and Election, Appointment, Powers, Functions and Jurisdiction of Dolloi/Sirdar and Waheh Shnong) Act, 2015 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2015' or 'the Act']; and further seeks to question the resolution of Executive Committee of the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council [hereinafter referred to as 'JHADC' or 'the District Council'] for creating a new Elaka to be known as "Elaka Sumer" within its jurisdiction.

(2.) The petitioner has stated the grievance against carving of a new Elaka out of Elaka Raliang by JHADC in terms of Sec. 3(2)(a) of the Act of 2015 with the averments that Elaka Raliang is one of the Elakas within the jurisdiction of JHADC and is comprising of six Raij namely, (i) Raij Raliang (ii) Raij Lapne (iii) Raij Ionglang (iv) Raij Niawkmai (v) Raij Khonshnong and (vi) Raij Pala. According to the petitioner, except Raij Pala, all other Raij have common religious rituals and any act like carving a new Elaka out of Elaka Raliang would be violative of his Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

(3.) The provisions contained in sub-section (2) of Sec. 3 of the Act of 2015 have been questioned as being ultra vires the Constitution of India to the extent creation of a new Elaka has been permitted therein. It is submitted that Paragraph 3 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India does not invest the District Council with any power to make laws for the purpose of creating a new Elaka and hence, such provisions, as contained in sub-section (2) of Sec. 3 of the Act of 2015, are required to be struck down as being unconstitutional. It is also submitted that Dorbar Elaka Raliang has strongly opposed the decision of the Executive Committee of JHADC to create a new Elaka and has adopted a resolution to that effect on 13.03.2017, but the respondents were proposing to seek the approval of the District Council in Session of their decision to create the said new Elaka known as Sumer Elaka; and such an effort on the part of the respondents deserves to be declared as illegal and invalid.