Thursday, December 12, 2024
spot_img

No pressure from top, says Govt

Date:

Share post:

spot_img
spot_img

By Our Reporter

 SHILLONG: The State Chief Secretary WMS Pariat has denied that there was any pressure from the top which compelled the Government to reappoint senior lawyer SP Mahanta as the Additional Advocate General.

“As far as my knowledge goes, the Government took the decision to reinstate Mahanta after it found out that the appeal period on the case where the lower court has given the judgement in favour of Mahanta had ended,” Pariat said while speaking to reporters here on Monday.

The Chief Secretary informed that at the time of issuing of appointment there was no official communiqué with the Government about the fresh appeal on the judgement of the lower court which had acquitted Mahanta from the alleged land grabbing case.

When informed that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the court of Deputy Commissioner (District Judge) in February within 19 days after the lower court passed its judgement, he said that such information was not available with the Government.

“It is possible that there was a delay on the part of the court to send an official communiqué on this fresh appeal,” Pariat said.

When asked if the Government would consider removing Mahanta from the post he is holding, the Chief Secretary said that they would have to first study the case before they would taking a final decision on the matter.

It may be mentioned that the petitioner Tushar Nath Bhattacharjee had filed a suit in 2004 against Mahanta and his wife alleging encroachment into his 14,285 sq feet parental property at Lower Lauchaumiere, Shillong. On February 10, the Munsif court passed its verdict in favour of the senior lawyer SP Mahanta by dismissing the petition of the NRI and termed the case against Mahanta as “false and vexatious by suppressing necessary facts with a view to harass the defendants.” Bhattacharjee and his two sisters had filed a case against Mahanta and his wife in the district magistrate’s court here in April 2004.

“Regarding the subject- 14,285 sq feet property, there is no sale deed, only a sale agreement dated 04.03.1992. In this agreement, my alleged signature was witnessed by Mahanta himself as an advocate on 04.03.1992 when I was actually thousands of miles away, employed in Sydney, Australia. This can be verified by my passport record,” the NRI alleged.

The NRI also alleged that during his absence from India, Mahanta executed a fraudulent sale deed dated March 4, 1992 by forging his signature and presenting an imposter before a local court. In March 2005, Bhattacharjee filed an FIR against Mahanta, but the senior lawyer evaded arrest by availing an anticipatory bail.

spot_img
spot_img

Related articles

Turkey fines Meta over child privacy breach

Ankara, Dec 11: Turkey's data protection authority, the Personal Data Protection Authority (KVKK), has fined Meta, the parent...

India’s renewable energy capacity logs 14.2 pc growth at 213.7 GW

New Delhi, Dec 11: India’s total non-fossil fuel installed capacity reached 213.70 GW in November, marking an impressive...

India poised to become leading maritime player: PM Modi

New Delhi, Dec 11: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday highlighted that with a strategic location in the...

Syrian militants lift curfew in Damascus, urge residents to return to work

Damascus, Dec 11:  Syria's Military Operations Administration announced Wednesday that it has lifted the curfew previously imposed on...