Ambiya Begum vs State Of Meghalaya & Ors

H. S. Thangkhiew, J

Heard Mr. J. Shylla, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice.

Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Ms. R. Colney, learned GA is present on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1 to 5, and Ms. M.L. Tlau, the caveator is present and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 6, so no further notice is called for.

The complaint in the writ petition is that the petitioner who is stated to be wife of the Ex-Secretary of Sobribari VEC has been barred from tendering her candidacy for the elections, which is scheduled to be held on 15.06.2026.

Mr. J. Shylla, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has in no way been implicated in any manner in the earlier proceedings concerning the VEC, wherein her husband was the Secretary, but for the reasons best known to the respondents by the impugned order dated 25.05.2026, she has been debarred from taking part in the elections. He therefore, prays that as the elections are due on 15.06.2026, and the nominations are to be filed by 8th & 9th June, 2026, the petitioner be allowed to contest the same.

Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Ms. R. Colney, learned GA for the respondents Nos. 1 to 5, has at the outset submitted that the instant matter has also received the attention of this Court by way of the earlier writ petition, wherein an Enquiry had been conducted into the affairs of the VEC of Sobribari, on the orders of this Court. The learned AAG has drawn the attention of this Court to the Enquiry Report dated 30.09.2025, annexed at Annexure-5 to the writ petition, and submits that in the findings under the caption 'Disciplinary Action', it has been clearly stated that the writ petitioner who is the immediate spouse of the Ex- Secretary was to be barred from contesting future elections. He therefore, submits that as the Enquiry Report is dated 30.09.2025, the writ petitioner had ample opportunity to assail the same, before the appropriate authority, but instead has chosen the eleventh hour to come and approach this Court.

Ms. M.L. Tlau, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6, has submitted that further complaints have been made, which have been suppressed in the writ petition, wherein certain allegations have been made against the writ petitioner, which are pending consideration.

On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, be that as it may, as it seen in the face of the records itself more specifically the Enquiry Report dated 30.09.2025, wherein findings have been arrived at debarring the writ petitioner from taking part in future elections, the writ petitioner in the considered of this Court is not entitled to any relief at this stage, and the writ petition accordingly stands dismissed.