Meghalaya High Court
Shri. Dale-Mid-Gift Marbaniang vs Khasi Hills Autonomous on 23 June, 2025
Serial No. 06
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
MC(WPC) No.137 of 2025 in
WP(C) No.261 of 2025 Date of Order: 23.06.2025
Shri. Dale-Mid-Gift Marbaniang Vs Khasi Hills Autonomous
District Council & 2 ors
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. L. Khyriem, Adv
Mr. P. Lyngdoh, Adv
For the Respondent(s) :Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, Adv
Heard Mr. L. Khyriem, learned counsel appearing for the applicant
and also Mr. C.C.T. Sangma, learned counsel appearing for the opposite
parties.
By this application the applicant has prayed for stay of the
impugned Office Order No.372 dated 30.05.2025 passed by the opposite
party No.4 by which the regularization of service of the applicant as
Junior Architect was revoked and he was reverted back as a Contractual
Junior Architect.
It transpires from the submissions made on behalf of the rival
parties and the materials on record that the applicant was appointed as a
Contractual Junior Architect vide Office Memo
No.DC.1/21/2023/14(a)/1129 dated 26.10.2023 in pursuant to the
advertisement vide Memo No.DC.I/21/2023/5/888 dated 22.08.2023.
After completion of almost 1 year of service as a contractual employee,
Page 1 of 2
the service of the applicant was regularized as Junior Architect vide
Office Order No.724 dated 01.10.2024, on the basis of the decision of the
Executive Committee of the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council
(KHADC). However, by the impugned Office Order No.372 dated
30.05.2025, the regularization of the applicant as Junior Architect was
revoked and he was reverted back as a Contractual Junior Architect. The
impugned Office Order, prima facie, does not indicate that the applicant
was issued with a notice or provided with any opportunity of hearing
before the decision to revoke his regularization as Junior Architect was
made. Although, in the impugned Office Order, the regularization of
service of the applicant de hors the applicable rule was stated to be the
reason for revocation of regularization of service of the applicant, nothing
specific has been spelt out to indicate as to what particular aspect of the
applicable rule was not adhered to while regularizing the service of the
applicant.
In view of the above, at this juncture, it is deemed appropriate to
suspend the operation of the impugned Office Order No.372 dated
30.05.2025 till the returnable date.
List this matter along with the main writ petition.
Judge
Meghalaya
23.06.2025
“Shrity,PS”
Page 2 of 2