SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Megh) 72

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
MOHAMMAD YAQOOB MIR, H.S. THANGKHIEW, JJ.
State Of Meghalaya And Others — Appellant
Versus
Amon Rana And Others — Respondent
WA No. 3 of 2019
Decided on : 24-05-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. A Kumar, Advocate General with Ms. R Colney, GA
For the Respondent: Mr. R. Gurung, Ms. A Paul, ASG

The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to pleadings and issues raised in the writ petition, the principles of judicial review, and the need to uphold constitutional principles.

Headnote:

Judgment - WP(C) No.448 of 2018 - [Citizenship Act, Notifications, Judicial Review] - The court discussed the issue of domicile certificate and permanent certificate, the validity of certain notifications, and the need for legislation to safeguard the interest of certain religious and ethnic groups. The court's decision was influenced by the legal principles of judicial review, constitutional principles, and the need for adherence to pleadings and issues raised in the writ petition.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitioner applied for a domicile certificate for recruitment in the armed forces, which was delayed due to issues with the birth certificate. The court found that the delay was unnecessary and the provisional certificate issued to the petitioner should be treated as final.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the judgment legally flawed and inconsistent with constitutional principles, setting it aside in its entirety.

Issues: The court addressed the delay in issuing the domicile certificate, the validity of certain notifications, and the need for legislation to safeguard the interest of specific religious and ethnic groups.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the need for adherence to pleadings and issues raised in the writ petition, the principles of judicial review, and the importance of upholding constitutional principles.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the provisional certificate issued to the petitioner was treated as final. The appeal succeeded and was disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J.

By medium of this appeal, judgment dated 10.12.2018 passed in WP (C) No.448 of 2018 captioned "Shri Amon Rana v. State of Meghalaya & ors, has been assailed on numerous grounds as enumerated in para-8 of the memo of appeal.

2. It was brought to the notice of the Court that in view of the observations made and directions passed in the judgment impugned regarding matters which were not issues in the writ petition, SLP has been filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court with the following prayer:-

    "(a) Issue appropriate writ/direction directing the Hon’ble Chief Justice, Meghalaya High Court, Shillong to withdraw all judicial works from Hon’ble Justice S.R. Sen forthwith;

(b) Pass ad interim ex-parte relief in terms of prayer (a);

(c) Pass such other of further orders as to this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Pendency of SLP with aforesaid prayer in our humble opinion will not operate as a bar for deciding the instant appeal as is also submitted by learned counsel for the parties, more so Hon’ble Judge against whom aforesaid relief has been sought on reaching superannuation has retired.

4. Learned Advocate General while projecting the case for reversal of the judgment impugned has placed reliance on various judgments rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court to be quoted while considering his contentions herein below.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that the respondent No.1 had applied for certificate required to be produced for recruitment in armed force, before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong (appellant herein), but was dragged continuously. Appointment of petitioner vide appointment order dated 11.08.2018 was subject to the production of said certificate and other documents. Faced with uncertainty due to in action on the part of the appellant was constrained to file writ petitions. Provisional certificate has been granted same may be treated as final.

6. Learned ASG had produced a communication addressed to her by the Deputy Secretary where-under she has been asked to seek three weeks time for filing reply. Since the submissions on behalf of Advocate General appearing for the appellants and of learned counsel for respondent No.1 were concluded on 20.05.2019, therefore, she made a submission that the issue of domicile certificate is a larger issue requires proper adjudication, therefore, the case may be remanded so that writ petition is a fresh decided.

7. The submission of learned ASG that she is under instructions to seek three weeks time to file reply is totally misplaced. Firstly, respondents No.2 and 3 were not the party to the main petition they were arrayed as party respondents No.2 and 3 by learned Single Judge vide order dated 27.11.2018 on their behalf no reply or counter affidavit was filed as against the writ petition. Her submission has been recorded in the judgment impugned which reads as under:-

    "Ms. A Paul, learned ASG submits that from para 8 of the affidavit, it is clear that the Government of Meghalaya has an intention not to grant the domicile certificate, which goes against the whole concept of the Constitution of India and prayed that necessary judgment may be passed."

8. The contention of learned ASG that grant of domicile certificate is a larger issue and has to be consistent with the Citizenship Act and matter is not a State subject, runs contrary to her submission as she has made before learned Single Judge. That apart, according to her, Notification dated 13.01.1995 as has been quashed was required to be quashed. But that submission is without any substance because that Notification dated 13.01.1995 issued by the Government of Meghalaya, Political Department provides that Permanent Residence Certificate/Domicile Certificate should not be issued in case of candidates wishing to join arm

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                  supreme today icon
                  logo-black

                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                  Please visit our Training & Support
                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top