Meghalaya High Court
1.Shri Abdul Rashid. vs . 1. Shri Aniul Haque. on 21 August, 2025
2025:MLHC:747
Serial No.01
Supple List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Review Petn. No. 10 of 2025 in
WP(C) No. 491 of 2021. Date of Order: 21.08.2025
____________________________________________________________
1.Shri Abdul Rashid. Vs. 1. Shri Aniul Haque.
S/o (Late) Abdul Latif, 2. Shri Wazul Haque.
a
Resident of 13 JB, Jhalupara, 3. Shri Mainul Haque.
Shillong- 793002, 4.Shri Afzal Haque.
District: East Khasi Hills, All sons of (L) Shri Anwarul Haque
Meghalaya.
All residents of 13A JB, Cantonment
Shillong- 793002, East Khasi Hills
2. Smt Zubeda Khatoon District, Meghalaya.
Wife of (L) Sk. Md. Ahmed
Resident of 59 CB, Lower Paltan 5. The Shillong Cantonment Board
Bazar, Shillong- 793002, Represented by the Chief Executive
District: East Khasi Hills, Officer, Shillong
Meghalaya. East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya.
3. SK Md. Sadique 6. The Chief Executive Officer,
Resident of 13a JB, Jhalapura, Cantonment Board, Shillong,
Shillong- 793002, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya.
District: East Khasi Hills,
Meghalaya.
Represented by his wife Smti
Samsun Nisa.
4. Md. Arshad Qureshi
S/o (Late) Sk Md. Ayub and (L)
Rabia Khatoon.
Resident of Lumdiengjri, Garikhana,
Shillong - 793002,
District: East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya.
Page 1 of 4
2025:MLHC:747
.....PETITIOENRS .....RESPONDENTS.
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. S. D. Upadhaya, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. P. Mahanta, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. D. Dkhar, Adv.
ORAL:-
Heard Mr. S. D. Upadhaya, learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners and Mr. S. P. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.
D. Dkhar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.
1. By this review application, the petitioners have sought for review of
the judgment and order dated 06-08-2025 passed in WP(C) No. 491 of 2021
whereby a direction was issued to the Cantonment Board to consider the
application for mutation filed by the writ petitioners/ respondent Nos. 1 – 4
herein.
2. Mr. S. D. Upadhya, learned Counsel for the review petitioners submits
that the judgment and order dated 06-08-2025 was passed on the projection
of writ petitioners that their application for mutation was not considered and
disposed of by the Cantonment Board. He submits that perusal of the
Annexure – 18, pages 44 – 45 of the writ petition would reveal that the
mutation application of the writ petitioners were disposed of by the
concerned authorities. He, therefore, contends that the judgment and orderPage 2 of 4
2025:MLHC:747dated 06-08-2025 suffers from apparent error as there had arisen no occasion
for this Court to issue the direction for consideration of the mutation
application which already stood disposed of. He, thus, submits that it is a fit
case where power of review of the Court be exercised to recall the judgment
and order dated 06-08-2025.
3. Mr. S. P. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
respondent No. 5 & 6 (Shillong Cantonment Board), on the other hand, has
vehemently refuted the contention of the review petitioners and submitted
that the application of the writ petitioners concerning the mutation of lease
hold right of Holding No.13A J.B. Jhalupara Cantonment, Shillong is still
under consideration. In support of his submission, the learned Senior
Counsel has placed on record a communication dated 27-05-2024 of the
Chief Executive Officer, Shillong Cantonment Board, whereby certain
documents were called for from the concerned party to the mutation
proceeding.
4. Perusal of the Annexure-18 to the writ petition reveals that it is a
representation dated 06-02-2021 addressed to the Chief Executive Officer,
Shillong Cantonment Board by the writ petitioners/ respondent Nos. 1-4
seeking rejection of the objection raised by the review petitioners. Therefore,
it is not a document issued by the Cantonment Board. The contents of the
Annexure-18 do not reveal that the mutation application of the writ
petitioners were disposed of by the Cantonment Board at any point of time.
Further, the submission advanced by the learned Senior Counsel for the
Cantonment Board makes it amply clear that the mutation application in
question is still under consideration of the appropriate authorities of the
Cantonment Board. Hence, no illegality or infirmity can be attributed to the
judgment and order passed in the writ petition.
Page 3 of 4
2025:MLHC:747
5. Viewed from above, there appears to be no apparent error in the
judgment and order dated 06-08-2025 passed in WP(C) No. 491 of 2021.
There is no merit in this review application and the same stands rejected.
Judge
Meghalaya
21.08.2025
“Biswarup PS”
Page 4 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by BISWARUP
BHATTACHARJEE
Date: 2025.08.21 18:26:54 IST