The controversy in this writ petition relates to Nohnaship of the Akhing and No. 1 -1 (5) of Nowa Ron gcheng Akhing. The petitioner claim himself to be the lawful heir of late Ranma Sangma and his wife late Rotdi Manak Meehik, who were originally the Nokmas of the said Akhing. According to the petitioner they were compelled to leave the village along with other villagers because of the epitemic and during their absence respondent Nos.2 and 3 were appointed as Nokma of Nowa Rongcheng Akhing and recorded their name accordingly.

2. The petitioner has annexed an order dated 3.12.66 passed by the Executive Member lie Revenue etc of Garo Hills District Council. The said order reads as follows:

"3.12.66: Sri Ongran Marak and others including wife of Ungran Rono Sangma of Nowa Rongcheng on present today.

With reference to my order dated Tura the 20th November, 1965 by which Ongran Marak was appointed a custodian Nokma of the all Akhing under circumstances stated therein and mat if no objection is coming forward within a year the same person would be appointed a permanent Nokma. I now appoint Sri Ongran Marak and his wife Rono Sangma of Nowa Rongheng village as Nokmas of the Nowa Rongcheng Akhing with effect from 3.12.66 and their names shall be recorded as such in all document Map. GT and any other matter paper connecting with this Akhing.

Sd/-KP Marak, EAI i/e Revenue

Garo, Tura, 3.12.66."

The petitioner also brought to my notice an order dated 26.7.67 passed by the Executive Member, I/c Revenue of the Garo Hills District Council. From the said order it appears that the petitioner as well as the respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared before the Executive Member on the said date, and the learned Executive Member made the following endorsement in the order sheet.

The case appears to be complicated is needs revision or study of case record etc. The decision on the case will be announced on 21.8.67. Parties may be informed accordingly...."

3. I have not made aware as to whether any decision of the case was subsequently announced on 21.8.67 as evinced from the orders. The review e petition was presented before the learned Executive Member which was numbered as GDC-REV. No. 16 A/C of 198/-88. The learned Executive Member heard both the parties and considering rival claims passed the order dated 14.8.85 refusing to review the said order. The order of the learned Executive Member was assailed by way of an appeal before the Chief Executive Member, Garo Hills District Council, and the learned Chief Executive Member upon hearing the parties and upon considering the materials on record rejected the appeal and uphold the order of the learned Executive Member, Revenue dated 14.8.89. Hence this writ application.

4. Mr. P. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the right of the petitioner to continue as the Nokma of the Akhing land has been taken away in a most arbitrary fashion without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. According to Mr. Talukdar it has not only affected the right of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 but also as a result jeoparadised the rights of the Maharis, and, therefore, the authorities before passing the impugned order was duly bound to take the petitioners as well as the Maharis into confidence. Mr. R. Kar, learned counsel, assisted by Mr. WC Sangma appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits, on the otherhand, that no illegality and impropriety has been committed by the authorities requiring interference from this Court. According to Mr. Kar, the authorities duly considered the case of the petitioner viz-a-viz the case of the respondents and on fair consideration of the respective cases, the authorities arrived on its' own decision in conformity with the law and in the absence of any infirmity in the decision making process this Court should loath intervence in this matter, and, therefore, it should dismiss the same.

5. The Nokmashp, so long, was administered by the Deputy Commissioner of the district until th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document