The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for complete pleadings and evidence in a writ petition, the need to prove a custom as ancient, certain, and reasonable, and the importance of upholding longstanding decisions.

T. Nandakumar Singh, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Bench (learned Single Judge) dated 26.08.2011 allowing the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.84(SH)2003 filed by the principal respondents/writ petitioners wherein, the learned Single Judge held that who could be the Nokma of Jendragre Akhing had been decided in the year 1937 by the Deputy Commissioner, Garo Hills vide order dated 07.08.1937, which remains unchallenged and accepted for the last more than 70 years, shall not be opened on the objection raised by the present appellants i.e. respondents No.5 & 6 in the writ petition, after they slept over the matter for the last 70 years and thereby set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.1999 passed by the Executive Member, I/C Revenue, Garo Hills District Council, Tura declaring that respondents No.5 & 6 are the Nokmas of Jendragiri Akhing and also the order dated 08.01.2003 passed by the Chief Executive Member, Garo Hills District Council, Tura in GDC-Rev/Appl. No.22A/C of 1999 for rejecting the appeal and upheld the judgment and order dated 28.01.1999 passed by the Executive Member, I/C Revenue, Garo Hills District Council, Tura.

2. Heard Mr. K Paul, learned counsel for the appellants i.e. respondents No.5 & 6 in the writ petition, Mr. VK Jindal, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. QB Lamare, learned counsel appearing for the principal respondents/writ petitioners and Mr. S Dey, learned counsel for the proforma respondents.

3. The present appellants did not file affidavit-in-opposition in the writ petition. However, learned Single Judge was lenient enough to consider the verbal submission of fact by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. But party can only succeeds their case only on the basis of fact mentioned in the pleadings and in the absence of pleadings, whatever be the submission made by the learned counsel for the party regarding the fact, cannot be the basis for deciding the fact of the case.

4. The learned Single Judge had mentioned the graphic statements of facts of the writ petitioner i.e. principal respondents and also the verbal submission of fact by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants in the impugned judgment and order dated 26.08.2011. The operative portions of the judgment and order dated 26.08.2011 of the learned Single Judge, which deal with the fact of the case are quoted hereunder:-

“2. This case has a chequered history. It is hoped that this is a litigation to end all litigations between the parties over the Nokmaship of the Akhing land. Before proceeding further, I may first briefly refer to the facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioners. Sometime in the year 1995 the late Parkin Marak had moved the Executive Member-in-charge of Land Revenue (“EM” for short), Garo Hills District Council for appointing him as the Nokma of the Akhing, which was registered as GDC Rev/11 A/C of 1995-96. It was stated in the application that the late Rasan R. Marak, husband of late Tame A. Sangma, who were the last recorded Nokma had died in 1995 and as per Garo custom, the Maharis of this particular Akhing decided to appoint the said Parkin R. Marak and Mrs. Donme A. Sangma as the Nokma of the Akhing land. On the death of the said Parkin Marak, a substitution application was filed by the petitioner and three others on 17-8-1998 stating that all Chras and Chatchis of A’gitok Koksep clan of Jendragre had proposed the names of the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner 2, who is none other than the daughter of the said Donme A. Sangma in place of the late Parkin Marak and his wife Donme A. Sangma and prayed that they be allowed to substitute the deceased petitioners. The application was immediately opposed by the respondents No. 5 and 6 on the ground of partiality of the Mauzadar’s report and their non-selection by the Mahari clan. According to the petitioners, they are the legal heirs of the last recorded Nokmas of the Akhing land, namely, the lat