Dorbar Shnong Laitsohum v. State of Meghalaya and 4 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶1When the matter was taken up today, Mr. N.Syngkon, learned GA on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1-3 has submitted that the matter can be closed, inasmuch as, the Public Health Engineering Department has taken remedial measures to ensure water supply in the village. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by the State respondents in this regard, wherein at paragraphs 8 and 9, which is supported with photographs, details of the source and pumpsets which had been installed,

have been given. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the said affidavit is reproduced hereinbelow:

"8. That a new water supply scheme for Laitsohum Village, namely "Laitsohum Water Supply Scheme" was sanctioned vide Order No. NO. SPVS.3/6/CN/Water Supply/2020-21/11, dated

03.06.2020, at an estimated cost of Rs. 1,48,41,900.00 (Rupees One crore forty eight lakhs forty one thousand and nine hundred) only. The said water supply scheme is sanctioned under the Special Purpose Vehicle Society (SPVS).

¶9That the "Laitsohum Water Supply Scheme" is designed for providing Functional Household Tapped Connections to all 52 households in Laitsohum village. It is further stated that the Scheme is 100 percent completed and presently commissioning, trial and testing of pumpsets for supplying water to all households is in progress."

¶2However, Mr. K.V.Kharlyngdoh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the water scheme is now in place, the supply is inadequate to meet the needs of the village.

¶3As the bone of contention is only with regard to the supply of water, any shortfall or inadequacy is to be taken up by the villages with the authorities themselves. Accordingly, on the basis of the affidavit filed by the State respondents, this writ petition is closed at this stage and stands disposed of.

¶4However, the writ petitioner, if still aggrieved, may take up the matter with the authorities, and it is given liberty to approach this Court if a fresh cause of action, should arise.

¶5Accordingly, matter stands disposed of.

Judge Meghalaya

17.05.2024 "Samantha PS"

Serial No.10 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C). No. 9 of 2024 Date of Decision :17.05.2024 Dorbar Shnong Laitsohum Represented by its Headman, Nonglwai Sirdarship, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. …Petitioner Vs. 1. State of Meghalaya Represented by the Secretary State Public Engineering Department Shillong. 2. The Chief Engineer (P.H.E.) Lower Lachumiere, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. 3. The Sub-Division Officer (P.H.E.) Mawsynram Division East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. 4. The Syiem (Chief) Mawsynram Syiemship, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. 5. Dorbar Shnong Phutphanblei Represented by its Headman Mawsynram Syiemship, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. …Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge. Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. K.V. Kharlyngdoh, Adv. Mr. S.Singphoo, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr.N.Syngkon, GA for R 1-3. Mr. M.L. Nongpiur, Adv. for R 4. Mr. E.Nongbri, Adv. for R 5 i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: