SHILLONG: The High Court of Meghalaya has imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on former ANVC-B chairman Rimpu Marak for filing a PIL challenging the powers of GHADC on land transfer while claiming that he was a Nokma.
During the hearing on the matter on Tuesday, the court said the claim of Nokmaship by the petitioner is a matter of serious doubt and dispute.
Referring to other points in the PIL, the court also said the dispute regarding a part of the land of Aking between Nokma Enilla Ch. Marak and the State and other authorities is pending adjudication in the civil court.
According to the court, the claim as sought to be made by the petitioner as Nokma had given rise to serious complaints and FIRs and had led to the prohibitory order by the West Garo Hills deputy commissioner.
The petitioner through his counsel N. Syngkon had challenged the powers of GHADC to enact any law on transfer of land and to issue pattas for transfer of land while creating new plain mauzas.
The petitioner also questioned the validity of the Garo Hills District (Transfer of Land) Act, 1955 as made by GHADC.
However, the counsel of GHADC Sujit Dey said the record shows that contrary to the claim of the petitioner, complaints have been made against his claim as Nokma of Tura town and the deputy commissioner had issued the order under Section 144 CrPC, prohibiting the activities of the office established by him.
Hearing both the parties, the court said that while a bona fide PIL for the benefit of the public at large may be entertained by the court on being satisfied of the cause but, at the same time, a PIL filed only for the purpose of sub-serving the personal cause of the petitioner and which stands rather at conflict with public interest, is treated as the grossest abuse of the process of law and entails penal consequences.
Hence, the court said Rs 1 lakh should be deposited by the petitioner within 30 days with the West Garo Hills deputy commissioner.
After the deposit, the deputy commissioner will forward the amount to the Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority for utilising the same for legal aid to the needy people of Garo Hills.
The court further said it did not find any reason to take up for adjudication the issues relating to the validity of the Garo Hills District (Transfer of Land) Act, 1955 in this petition but would keep such issues open to be taken up at the appropriate occasion in an appropriate petition.
