AMIR CH. MARAK P.R. PASKE, D.S PAJAT,R PAHSYNTIEW vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. Advocate - N.G. SHYLLA, SR. GA MEGHALAYA, I SYIEMLIEH, R COLNEY,MR. A KUMAR, AG — WP(C)/231/2026

Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.

Next hearing 23-Jun-2026

CNR: MLHC010008342026

Filing Number

WP(C)/548/2026

Filing Date

27-May-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/231/2026

Registration Date

27-May-2026

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WRIT PETITION RELATING TO STATE GOVT. EMPLOYEES ( 2 )

Sub-Category

Selection and appointment ( 10023 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Last updated 02-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIR CH. MARAK P.R. PASKE, D.S PAJAT,R PAHSYNTIEW

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. Advocate - N.G. SHYLLA, SR. GA (Government Advocate) MEGHALAYA, I SYIEMLIEH, R COLNEY,MR. A KUMAR, AG

Case History

  1. 23-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 23-Jun-2026

    Orders

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew

  3. 01-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. ThangkhiewView PDF

    Case Summary: WP(C) 231/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned; no interim relief granted at this stage. The petitioner challenged a District Selection Committee's selection list, alleging bias because one selected candidate was the son of the Vice Chairman, and that he (petitioner) secured highest written exam marks but lowest interview marks, placing him 10th against 9 vacancies. The court acknowledged the petitioner's contentions as factually correct but declined to stay appointments already accorded. The court directed both parties to file affidavits within three weeks and listed the matter for 23-06-2026, noting the entire selection process remains subject to the petition's final outcome. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 01-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 27-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/231/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP(C) 231/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned; no interim relief granted at this stage. The petitioner challenged a District Selection Committee's selection list, alleging bias because one selected candidate was the son of the Vice Chairman, and that he (petitioner) secured highest written exam marks but lowest interview marks, placing him 10th against 9 vacancies. The court acknowledged the petitioner's contentions as factually correct but declined to stay appointments already accorded. The court directed both parties to file affidavits within three weeks and listed the matter for 23-06-2026, noting the entire selection process remains subject to the petition's final outcome. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case