Meta Pixel
CNR: MLHC010006892021
DISPOSED

Lakilda R. Sangma vs State Of Meghalaya And 4 Ors.

Case NumberMC(WPC)/94/2021
Date of Filing28 Sept 2021
Case TypeMC(WPC)
Last Hearing23 Mar 2022
State--
City--
Year of Filing2021

Party Details

Petitioner
  • LAKILDA R. SANGMA
Respondent
  • STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 4 ORS.

Case Summary

LAKILDA R. SANGMA filed Case No. MC(WPC)/94/2021 in the Meghalaya High Court on 28 Sept 2021 against STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 4 ORS.. The case has undergone 7 hearings over 5 months. The case was disposed of on 23 Mar 2022. 1 order has been issued in this matter.

Hearing History (7)

  • DISPOSED

    Judge: N/A

  • 23MAR 2022
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW

  • 3MAR 2022
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW

  • 11FEB 2022
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW

  • 1DEC 2021
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW

  • 9NOV 2021
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW

  • 5OCT 2021
    ORDERS

    Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT MORE (FORMER JUDGE)

Orders (1)

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗

1 Serial No.

28 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG MC(WPC) No.

94 of 2021 In WP(C) No.

263 of 2021 Date of Order: 05.04.2022 Smti.

Lakilda R.

Sangma Vs.

State of Meghalaya & Ors.

Coram: Hon’ble Mr.

Justice H.

S.

Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr.

P.T.

Sangma, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr.

H.

Abraham, GA. (For R 1-3) Ms.

B.

Kharwanlang, Adv. vice Mr.

K.

Paul, Sr.

Adv. (For R 4 & 5).

Oral: 1.

The petitioner, it appears was appointed on 06.08.2010, by the respondent Nos.

1, 2 and 3 for the period of 89 days’ as Stenography Instructor at Industrial Training Institute, Williamnagar and since then the appointment has been extended from time to time, due to the unavailability of a regular selected candidate which is to be selected and appointed based on competitive examination to be conducted by the respondent Nos.

4 and 5.

2.

Also, it appears that there have been two advertisements, wherein exams have been held to select the candidate, but none qualified, and as such, the petitioner as per the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents continues to occupy the post.

2 3.

The prayer in the instant Misc.

Case, which though not very happily framed has also prayed for the release of her pending salary by the respondents, as the petitioner continues to discharge her duties against the post.

4.

In this view of the matter, the respondent Nos.

1-3 are directed to release the salary, if the petitioner is serving the post on adhoc basis, as stated.

5.

Accordingly, Misc.

Case stands closed and disposed of.

Judge Meghalaya 05.04.2022 “D.Thabah-PS”