High CourtsSingle Bench

Sanjukta Paul vs Meghalaya Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Meghalaya High Court · Decided on 15 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 MEG CK 1047

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.S. Thangkhiew, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 157 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 141 words

H. S. Thangkhiew, J

Heard Mr. R. Kharkrang, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice.

Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel is present and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1 & 2, so no further notice is called for in respect of these respondents.

Issue notice to the respondent No. 3, by registered AD, within 3(three) days.

The petitioner also prays that he may be permitted to effect personal service on the respondent No. 3.

Prayer is allowed.

A prayer has also made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for interim orders. However, on perusing the materials, it is noted that without the presence of the respondent No. 3, it would not be possible to issue any interim orders at this stage.

Accordingly, list this matter on 06.05.2026, for further orders and for consideration of the interim prayer.