Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Meghalaya High Court

Date Of Order : 12.09.2024 vs Smti. Mannaliza Lakiang on 12 September, 2024

Author: H.S.Thangkhiew

Bench: H.S.Thangkhiew

                                                           2024:MLHC:844


 Serial No.03
 Regular List
                        HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
                            AT SHILLONG


Cont.Cas(C). No. 15 of 2024

                                                Date of Order : 12.09.2024

Shri. Phol Khongliar
                                                                ...Petitioner

      -Versus-

Smti. Mannaliza Lakiang, MCS
District Collector/Additional Deputy Commissioner,
O/o. Deputy Commissioner, Shillong
East Khasi Hills District
Meghalaya.
                                                         ...Respondent

Coram:
      Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Chief Justice (Acting)

Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) :       Mr. S.R.Lyngdoh, Adv.

For the Respondent(s)           :       Mr. S.Sen, GA
                                        Ms. Z.E.Nongkynrih, GA.


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

2024:MLHC:844

1. An affidavit has been filed by the State respondent indicating the fact that on an application filed by the petitioner on 13-07-2023, pursuant to the order of this Court dated 04-07-2023, the matter was taken up by the Additional Deputy Commissioner wherein it was accepted that the land compensation for 54 metres which should have been awarded to the petitioner was instead given to one Shri. Pital Rynga. The affidavit also shows that the matter has then proceeded thereafter and by a letter dated 29th February, 2024, a request had been made for placement of funds to pay the compensation to the petitioner amongst others in the list as appended.

2. However, a side issue had arisen with regard to a reference by the Collector under Section 64 of RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 which does not seem to be the correct position to settle the matter as the instant issue involves only the manner of apportioning the compensation. As this Court is sitting in contempt jurisdiction, the only duty of the Court is to see if whether there is any willful violation of the order of the Court. A perusal of the materials shows that there is no willful violation, as such, no contempt lies and the same is closed and disposed of.

Chief Justice (Acting) Signature Not Verified 2 Digitally signed by SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA RYNJAH Date: 2024.09.12 18:21:13 IST