HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
KARMAJIT RABHA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 3 ORS. – Respondent
WP(C) 672 / 2025
Serial No. 15 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 672 of 2025 Date of Decision: 17.02.2026 Shri Karmajit Rabha, Age about 32 years S/o (L) Phulsing Rabha, R/o Kadamsali village P/O & P/S Tikrikilla, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya … Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Meghalaya represented by The Commissioner and Secretary, Education Department, Government of Meghalaya, Shillong
2. The Director of School Education & Literacy, Meghalaya, Shillong
3. The District School Education Officer, West Garo Hills, Tura
4. The Managing Committee, Roni-Asim Deficit Secondary School (Bollonggitok)
Represented by its President/Secretary …. Respondent(s)
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. L. Shongwan Adv. with Mr. S.S. Nongrum, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Abraham, GA (For R 1-3)
Mr. Z.A. Choudhury, Adv. (For R 4)
_________________________________________________________
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press:
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
1. The complaint of the writ petitioner before this Court is that though he has been placed under suspension since 07.04.2025, pending Disciplinary proceedings against him in connection with the services in Roni-Asim Deficit Secondary School, as a Science Teacher, he has not been paid the subsistence allowance.
2. Mr. Z.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4, has submitted that there are serious allegations against the writ petitioner with regard to fabricating of documents, and as such a Disciplinary proceeding was drawn up and he was placed under suspension.
3. This Court notes that the challenge in the writ petition is not against the substantive suspension or Disciplinary proceedings, but only with the factum of non-release of subsistence allowance to the petitioner. 4. In these circumstances as it is not disputed that the writ petitioner was serving in the school of the respondent No. 4, the respondent No. 4 is directed to release the subsistence allowance forthwith, preferably within a period of 4(four) weeks from today.
5. The matter stands closed and is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE Meghalaya 17.02.2026 “V. Lyndem-PS
VALENTINO LYNDEM
Date: 2026.02.18 17:01:27 IST
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.