Meghalaya High Court
South West Garo Hills District vs Meghalaya on 14 July, 2026
Author: H.S.Thangkhiew
Bench: H.S.Thangkhiew
2026:MLHC:710
Serial No.10
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C). No. 46 of 2026
Date of Decision: 14.07.2026
Shri Nurul Amin Khandokar
son of (L) Nazrul Islam Khandokar,
resident of Tosilderpara P.O & PS Mahendraganj,
South West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya.
...Petitioner
-Versus-
1. State of Meghalaya represented by the
Chief Secretary, Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong.
2. The Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya
Personnel & Admv. Reforms (B) Department,
Meghalaya, Shillong.
3. The Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya
Health & Family Welfare Department,
Meghalaya, Shillong
4. The Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya
Finance (Pension Cell) Department,
Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong.
5. The Director of Health Services (MI),
Meghalaya, Shillong.
6. The District Medical & Health Officer,
West Garo Hills, Tura.
7. The District Medical and Health Officer,
South West Garo Hills, Ampati.
1
2026:MLHC:710
8. The Treasury Officer,
Ampati District Treasury,
South West Garo Hills, Meghalaya.
9. The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
Meghalaya, Shillong.
...Respondents
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.A.Sheikh, Adv.
Mr. M.R.Marak, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Ms. S.Bhattacharjee, GA for R1-8.
Ms. E.B.Passah, Adv. for R 9.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. Mr. S.A.Sheikh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
in view of the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2, the Secretary to the
Government of Meghalaya, Personnel & Admv. Reforms (B) Department,
the matter can be closed.
2
2026:MLHC:710
2. Ms. S.Bhattacharjee, learned GA for the State respondents has also
submitted that the Cabinet in its meeting held on 30-06-2026, was pleased
to approve the proposal of regularisation, and the same has also been
reflected in the affidavit.
3. Accordingly, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the parties, and the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2, nothing
remains for consideration and the writ petition is closed and disposed of.
4. It is expected that the entire exercise should be completed preferably
within a period of four months.
Judge
Signature Not Verified 3
Digitally signed by
SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA
RYNJAH
Date: 2026.07.14 18:19:55 IST
