CHIBATH CH MARAK v. GARO HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ORS.
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2026-09-11. CHIBATH CH MARAK v. GARO HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Serial No. 36 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 94 of 2026 Date of Decision: 11. 09. 2026 Shri. Chibath Ch. Marak Son of Shri. Sikwan Ch. Sangma Resident of Balsik Aduma P. S Damal Asim, Dadenggre West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya :::Petitioner -Versus- 1. Garo Hills Autonomous District Council, Tura represented by the Chief Executive Member 2. Secretary to the Executive Committee Garo Hills Autonomous District Council, Tura 3. Shri. Witrol Marak Son of Shri. Biak Marak Resident of Ajrigre, Dadenggre West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya :::Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. L. Koch, Adv. vice Mr. M. F. Qureshi, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Dey, Adv. (For R 1&2) i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc. : ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1.
The writ petitioner being aggrieved with the non-settlement of the market in his favour inspite of the bid amount offered by him being the highest, but settled with the respondent No. 3, who had offered a lower bid, is before this Court with a prayer for quashing and setting aside the order of settlement in favour of the respondent No. 3, and to direct the respondents to settle the said contract of the market known as Dadenggre Haat market in his favour. 2. In the course of proceedings, however, Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 2 today has produced an th Order dated 25 July, 2026, wherein it is shown that the settlement of Dadenggre Bazar/Haat in favour of Shri. Witrol Marak for the year 2026- 27(Respondent No. 3), has been surrendered by the said respondent, and that the same has been accepted by the respondents No. 1 and 2. The order th dated 25 July, 2026 is taken on board and made part of the record. 3. Mr. L.
Koch, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner on this development has prayed that since the substantial matter does not survive for consideration any longer, he prays that appropriate direction be issued that the offer of the petitioner, which will be computed proportionately by the respondents, and the petitioner be considered for settlement of the said market for the remaining period of 2026-27. 4. Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel also is not averse to this direction, and submits that once the writ petitioner approaches the respondents, appropriate action will be taken thereon. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the baseline shall be taken from the offered bid amount of Rs. 14,50,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs and Fifty Thousand) only, for calculation of the remaining period accordingly. 5.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the th order dated 25 July, 2026, as it is seen that nothing survives for consideration, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of, by allowing the writ petitioner to approach the respondents within a period of 10(ten) days for consideration of his bid on the stated bid amount, as offered earlier and to be adjusted accordingly for the remaining period. 6. As ordered above, the writ petition stands closed and disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 11. 09. 2026 “D. Thabah-PS”
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.