MUNISING T. SANGMA Vs. GARO HILLS REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS instant writ petition is directed against the impugned orders dated 19.03.10 passed by the Executive Member, i/c Land & Revenue, GHADC, Tura and dated 02.05.11 passed by the CEM, GHADC, Tura.

(2.) THE petitioner 's case in nut shell is that, ''on 19.11.43 Shri Gajan Marak filed a petition to the DC vide A/C 42 of 1943 -44 to register his name as Co -A 'khing or 2nd A 'khing Nokma of Makkhragiri III -32(2) stating that their father -in -laws have jointly acquired Makkhragiri III -32(2) Akhingand therefore should also be registered as Co -Akhing Nokma/2nd A 'Khing Nokma but the said petition was rejected on 23.03.1944 since Sanjong had already been appointed as Nokma. After the death of the last recorded Nokma, the petitioner No. 1 filed a petition for registering the names of petitioner No. 2 & 3 as the successors of Makkhragiri A 'Khing Land III -32(2). On 30.11.93, the respondent No. 3 passed an order declaring and registering the names of petitioners No. 2 & No. 3 as the successors of Makkhragiri A 'Khing Land III -32(2). On 22.02.10, a spot enquiry report regarding the claim as 2nd Nokma and A 'mante A 'Khing Nokma was submitted. Thereafter, on 19.03.10, the respondent No. 3 passed and order registering the names of respondents No. 6 & 7 as the successor Nokma of Makkhragiri A 'Khing III -32(2) without giving the petitioners anyu opportunity to present their stand. Further, on 3.05.10, an appeal memo was filed by the petitioners before the respondent No. 2 praying to stay the operation of the impugned order dated 19.03.10 but the Hon 'ble Court upheld the impugned order dated 19.03.10 dismissing the appeal petition finding no sufficient ground. Hence this petition ''.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. S Dey, the learned counsel appeared for on behalf of the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 submitted that, there was nothing wrong in the impugned orders referred to above. The learned counsel further contended that, petitioner No. 1 had given NOC dated 30.11.93 before the learned EM, i/c Revenue, GHADC, Tura and on the basis of the NOC, the District Council authority appointed respondents No. 4 & 5 as Nokmas in the year 1993. Learned counsel Quenee Lamare endorsed the submission advanced by Mr S Dey, counsel.