Shri Santeman Mawnai vs State Of Meghalaya Represented By Its on 20 August, 2025

0
1


Shri Santeman Mawnai vs State Of Meghalaya Represented By Its on 20 August, 2025


Meghalaya High Court

Shri Santeman Mawnai vs State Of Meghalaya Represented By Its on 20 August, 2025

Author: H. S. Thangkhiew

Bench: H. S. Thangkhiew

                                                         2025:MLHC:746




Serial No. 07
Supplementary List
                 HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
                       AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 346 of 2025
                               Date of Decision: 20.08.2025

1. Shri Santeman Mawnai
2. Shri Esping L. Marshillong
3. Shri Siren War
4. Shri Tokin L. Mawnai                           ... Petitioner(s)
       Versus
1. State of Meghalaya represented by its
   Chief Secretary.

2. The Deputy Commissioner,
   Eastern West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya

3. The Executive Member,
   In-charge Elaka Administration etc.
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong

4. The Secretary, Executive Committee,
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong

5. The Deputy Secretary, Executive Committee,
   Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong

6. The Dorbar Shnong, Lad Pnar Thymmai, represented by
   The Sordar, Eastern West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya

7. The Dorbar Shnong, Lad Pnar Rim, represented by
   The Sordar, Eastern West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya
                                            .... Respondent(s)

8. The Syiem, Hima Nongkhlaw,
Nongkhlaw Syiemship. …. Proforma Respondent(s)

Page 1 of 2
2025:MLHC:746

_______________________________________________________
Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge

Appearance:

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. L. Syiem, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. N.G. Shylla, Sr. GA with
Mr. A.M. Pala, Adv. (For R 1&2)
Mr. J.K. Pariat, Adv. (For R 3-5)

i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:

ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:

(ORAL)

1. Mr. L. Syiem, learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that after filing of the instant writ petition, certain defects have been

noted, which need corrections. He prays that he may be allowed to

withdraw the same with a liberty to file afresh.

2. The same is not objected by the learned counsel for the

respondents.

3. Accordingly, the matter stands closed and disposed of on

withdrawal, however with liberty granted as prayed.

JUDGE

Meghalaya
20.08.2025
“V. Lyndem-PS”

Signature Not Verified Page 2 of 2
Digitally signed by
VALENTINO LYNDEM
Date: 2025.08.20 16:23:25 IST

Now Is the Time to Think About Your Small-Business Success

Find people with high expectations and a low tolerance...

Program Will Lend $10M to Detroit Minority Businesses

Find people with high expectations and a low tolerance...

Kansas City Has a Massive Array of Big National Companies

Find people with high expectations and a low tolerance...