30.08.2025 vs Khasi Hills Autonomous District … on 30 August, 2025

Meghalaya High Court

Date Of Decision: 30.08.2025 vs Khasi Hills Autonomous District … on 30 August, 2025

Author: H. S. Thangkhiew

Bench: H. S. Thangkhiew

                                                         2025:MLHC:777




 Serial No. 02
 Regular List
                  HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
                         AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 255 of 2025
                                 Date of Decision: 30.08.2025
Smti Kwenlin Sun,
D/o H. Mawlong,
R/o Lawmei Pdengshnong,
Shillong-793005, Meghalaya                 ... Petitioner(s)

      Versus

1. Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong
   Represented by the Secretary to the Executive Committee,
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong

2. The Secretary to the Executive Committee,
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong

3. The Joint Secretary, Executive Committee,
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong
                                                  ... Respondent(s)

Coram:
           Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge


Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s)     :    Dr. N. Mozika, Sr. Adv. with
                               Mr. M.L. Nongpiur, Adv.
                               Ms. M. Myrchiang, Adv.

For the Respondent(s)      :   Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, Sr. Adv. with
                               Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, Adv.



                                                              Page 1 of 5
                                                              2025:MLHC:777




________________________________________________________
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 cancellation of

a Work Order/Agreement dated 12.05.2023 for preparation and printing

of Digital Smartcard Based Sticker Computerised Trading Licence, for

the use of the respondents is before this Court assailing the same

primarily on the ground that though the Agreement is for a period of

5(five) years, the same was arbitrary cancelled by the impugned order

without any notice or show cause to the writ petitioner.

2. Dr. N. Mozika, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.L.

Nongpiur, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the writ

petitioner who is the proprietor of an enterprise engaged for the

preparation and printing of Digital Smartcards had been awarded the

Work Order dated 12.05.2023, on the agreed rate and that on the said

Agreement itself, it has been given that the period of the contract shall

be for 5(five) years subject to renewal for further period. The abrupt

cancellation he submits is in violation of the terms of the Agreement as

Page 2 of 5
2025:MLHC:777

well as arbitrary, inasmuch as, the writ petitioner was not even given a

notice. He therefore, prays that appropriate orders be passed as the

petitioner has been cloaked with valuable rights to execute the said

Work Order.

3. Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.

C.C.T. Sangma, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents has

submitted that the cancellation was necessitated due to the fact that on

examination of the manner as to how the work has been settled, it

appears that the same was not by the Executive Committee but by the

Executive Member i/c Trade etc., which he submits militates against

the provision of Rule 31 of The Assam and Meghalaya Autonomous

Districts (Constitution of District Councils) Rules, 1951 He further

submits that the manner in which the contract has been settled also

leaves much to be desired, as it involves a matter of public largesse. The

learned Senior counsel finally submits that there is no ground for

interference and if the petitioner is at all aggrieved, the respondents are

willing to re-examine the matter by affording her adequate opportunity

to present her case, before the Executive Committee.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perusing the materials on record, it is seen that the impugned order

Page 3 of 5
2025:MLHC:777

dated 04.06.2025, cancelling the work order of the writ petitioner was

apparently, only on the ground that the respondents have decided that

the preparation and printing of Digital Smartcards Based Sticker would

be done departmentally. The impugned order also does not disclose as

to what further action was proposed with regard to the existing contract,

that was rightly or wrongly granted to the writ petitioner. This Court

has also perused the extension dated 12.05.2023, whereby direction has

been given for preparation of 5(five) years work order. The same also

as submitted by the learned Senior counsel was under the signature of

only 1(one) Executive Member.

5. Without further dwelling into the merits of the matter or

examining the claims or counter-claims of the parties, it is deemed

appropriate to direct the respondent No. 2, to afford the writ petitioner

an opportunity to present her case as to why the work should not be

cancelled. On the presentation thereof, and after hearing the petitioner,

the respondent No. 2, shall take a balanced decision and pass

appropriate orders thereon. The entire exercise should be completed

within a period of 10(ten) days from the date of receipt of this order by

the respondents.

Page 4 of 5

2025:MLHC:777

6. The impugned order is accordingly set aside but it is further

provided that status quo to be maintained till final orders are passed by

the respondent No. 2.

7. With the above noted directions, the matter stands closed

and is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Meghalaya
30.08.2025
“V. Lyndem-PS”

Signature Not Verified Page 5 of 5
Digitally signed by
VALENTINO LYNDEM
Date: 2025.08.30 12:18:42 IST