Meghalaya High Court
Date Of Decision: 21.07.2025 vs Union Of India Represented By The … on 21 July, 2025
Author: H. S. Thangkhiew
Bench: H. S. Thangkhiew
2025:MLHC:626
Serial No. 67
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 97 of 2025
Date of Decision: 21.07.2025
USTM (University of Science and Technology Meghalaya)
Represented by Smti Anju Hazarika (Registrar of USTM)
D/o Shri Babul Hazarika,
R/o Techno City Kling Road,
9th Mile Baridua, Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. Union of India represented by the Secretary,
Govt. of India, Ministry of AYUSH B-BLOCK,
GPO Complex INA, New Delhi-110023
2. The President of Medical Assessment and Rating Board for
Indian System of Medicine (NCISM), Block Janakpur,
Delhi-110058
3. The Controller of Examinations National Commission for
Indian System of Medicine (NCISM), 61-65, Institutional Area,
Jankpuri "D" Block, New Delhi-110058
4. The Secretary National Commission Indian System of Medicine
(NCISM), T-19, 1st & 2nd Floor, Block-IV, Dhanwantari Bhavan,
Road No. 66, Punjabi Bagh (West), New Delhi-110026.
5. The Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya,
Health & Family Welfare Department, Shillong
6. Directorate of Health & Health and Family Welfare,
Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong. ... Respondent(s)
Page 1 of 3
2025:MLHC:626
________________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.T. Sangma, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI with
Ms. M. Myrchiang, Adv. (For R 1-4)
Mrs. T. Yangi B, AAG with
Ms. R. Colney, GA (For R 5&6
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
(ORAL)
1. Mr. P.T. Sangma, learned counsel for the petitioner
University prays that he may be allowed to withdraw the instant writ
application to enable the petitioner University to prefer a statutory
appeal under Section 35 (5) (6) of the National Commission for Indian
System of Medicine Act, 2020.
2. The same is not objected by the learned counsel for the
respondents.
3. It is noted that the matter concerns the admission into the
petitioner University of 36 numbers of students without counselling,
which has led to their academic career being jeopardized.
Page 2 of 3
2025:MLHC:626
4. As the counsel for the petitioner University prays that he
may be allowed to withdraw the instant writ petition, to prefer a
statutory appeal in view of the existence of alternate remedy, the prayer
is allowed and the petitioner University is given a liberty to approach
the appellate authority.
5. As the fate of the students hangs in the balance, it is
expected that the delay in preferring the appeal will be favourably
considered, by the appellate authority.
6. The matter accordingly stands closed and disposed of on
withdrawal, with a liberty granted as prayed.
JUDGE
Meghalaya
21.07.2025
“V. Lyndem-PS”
Signature Not Verified Page 3 of 3
Digitally signed by
VALENTINO LYNDEM
Date: 2025.07.21 15:00:13 IST