KRAIBITHSON R. SANGMA v. SWAPNIL TEMBE, IAS AND 2 ORS.
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2024-10-03. KRAIBITHSON R. SANGMA v. SWAPNIL TEMBE, IAS AND 2 ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 09 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Cont. Cas(C). No. 23 of 2024 in WP(C). No. 223 of 2023 Date of Decision : 03. 10. 2024 Shri. Kraibithson R. Sangma …Petitioner -Versus- 1. Shri. Swapnil Tembe, IAS, Director of Mass and Elementary Education, Shillong, Meghalaya. 2. Smti. Clarinda Marak, Sub-Divisional School Education Officer, Williamnagar East Garo Hills District, Meghalaya. 3. Shri. Calvin Harris Kharshiing, Pr. Accountant General (A & E), Meghalaya, Shillong. …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. P. T. Sangma, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A. H. Kharwanlang, Addl. Sr. GA with Ms. A. Thungwa, GA for R 1 & 2. Mr. K. Kharmawphlang, Adv. with Ms. E. B. Passah, Adv. for R 3. Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Whether approved for publication Yes/No JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Mr. A. H. Kharwanlang, learned Addl. Sr. GA appearing for the respondents No.
1 & 2 has submitted that there is no willful disobedience of the order of this Court and to this effect, has placed reliance on the affidavit filed by the respondents No. 1, wherein at para VIII it has been “VIII. That it is submitted that there is no willful disobedience of the order of this Hon’ble Court as can be seen from the above submissions, wherein, the petitioner case is being placed before the competent authority for consideration which also required holding of test and qualification of the same. Since the person has retired as non teaching staff i. e. chowkidar which was neither advertised nor was subjected to proper selection. Moreover, the petitioner has retired from the service and therefore his case is not falling within rules. However, in the light of observations made by this Hon’ble Court, the detailed steps would be required to consider his case for regularization and payment of pension, if any.
It is further submitted that there is no gross negligence, arbitrariness or malafide intent on part of the answering Respondent. Moreover, it may be stated that the services of the Petitioner is being considered for regularization but due to inter office communication considerable time has been consumed which has caused delay in the process of regularization of the Petitioner’s services. ” 2. Mr. P. T. Sagnma, learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the same. 3. As there is no willful violation of the order of this Court as the matter is under consideration, the contempt application is closed at this stage itself and stands disposed of. Judge Signature Not Verified 3 Digitally signed by SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA RYNJAH Date: 2024. 10. 03 17:17:36 IST
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.