Meghalaya High Court
M/S K.K. Beverages Pvt. Ltd., vs . State Of Meghalaya & Ors. on 21 February, 2026
Author: H. S. Thangkhiew
Bench: H. S. Thangkhiew
Serial No. 01
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C) No. 68 of 2026
Date of Order: 21.02.2026
M/s K.K. Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors.
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. M. Myrchiang, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. E.R. Chyne, GA (For R 1)
Heard Dr. N. Mozika, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. M.
Myrchiang, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Issue notice.
Mr. E.R. Chyne, learned GA is present and accepts notice on behalf
of the respondent No. 1, so no further notice is called for in respect of the
said respondent.
Issue notice to the remaining respondents by registered AD, within
3(three) days.
This writ petition is directed against an impugned letter issued by
the respondent No. 3, (Syiem Dorbar of Raid Marwet), whereby the
petitioner who is a Lessee of a plot of land located at 9th Mile Baridua, Ri-
Bhoi District, has been directed to vacate the same within 30/60 days from
Page 1 of 2
the date of receipt of the notice, which was received by the petitioner on
24.11.2025.
It is submitted by Dr. N. Mozika, learned Senior counsel that the
respondent No. 3 (Syiem Dorbar of Raid Marwet), has no legal authority
to issue such notices, and moreover the property in question had been
directly leased to the petitioner, apart from the fact that other collateral
proceedings before a Probate Court, are pending adjudication. He
therefore, submits that at this stage as the order being without jurisdiction,
the same be stayed.
Mr. E.R. Chyne, learned GA for the respondent No. 1, prays that he
may be allowed to obtain instructions and that it appears from the
materials that the land has been sold to a person, who is not a local tribal.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on examination
of the impugned letter, it appears that the order issued by the respondent
No. 3, is for eviction of the writ petitioner from the leased plot of land.
The factum of possession of the petitioner of the premises is supported by
the Lease document, which has been annexed and admitted by the
respondent No. 3.
The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has thus made out a
prima facie case at this stage, and as such the impugned letter/notice
(Annexure-12 to the writ petition) to vacate the lease plot of land located
at 9th Mile Baridua, Ri-Bhoi District, shall remain stayed until the next
date. It is further provided that the respondent shall not disturb the
operation of the Plant, in the meanwhile.
List this matter on 16.03.2026.
JUDGE
Meghalaya
21.02.2026
“V. Lyndem-PS”
Page 2 of 2
