JUDGMENT Heard Mr. H.R. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. P.Nongbri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and also Mr. L.Lyngdoh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2. 2. The brief fact leading to the filing of the present writ petition is noted. The land belongs to the clan is managed and maintained by an agent appointed by the members of the Clan. It is stated that after the death of the former agent (L) Neldison Wakuram Momin, the petitioner had been appointed as an agent in a meeting of the members of the Clan held on 11.08.2012. The said meeting of the members of the Clan held on 11.08.2012 had been accepted by the Syiem of Nongstoin. It is also stated that the members of the Wakuram clan in a meeting held on 21.08.2012 reiterated that in a meeting of the members of the Clan held on 11.08.2012, the petitioner had been appointed as an agent of the Clan in place of the deceased (L) Neldison Wakhuram Momin. A copy of the proceedings of the meeting i.e. 21.08.2012 is annexed in the present writ petition. 3. By the impugned order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Syiem of Nongstoin, the respondent No. 2 had been appointed as the agent for the management of the property belongs to the Wakhuram clan. The impugned order dated 21.02.2013 is a speaking order. In the impugned order dated 21.02.2013, there is a finding that from the very beginning, there has been no appointment of the agent from outside the Clan for management of the property belong to clan and the agent is to be appointed from within the Clan and also that the respondent No. 2 Shri. Nital Wakhuram Momin is the real brother of (L) Neldison Wakhuram Momin, who was the agent for management of the Clan property i.e. the property belongs to the Wakhuram Clan and the respondent No. 2 Shri. Nitai Wakhuram Momin was unanimously selected by the Wakhuram Clan as the agent for the management of the property belongs to the Wakhuram Clan. 4. In the writ petition and also in the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No. 2, it is stated that the petitioner had been appointed as an agent of the property belongs to the Wakuram clan by the members of the 3 (three) Clans. 4. In the writ petition and also in the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No. 2, it is stated that the petitioner had been appointed as an agent of the property belongs to the Wakuram clan by the members of the 3 (three) Clans. In the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated that in the year 1976, the first Wakuram agent was Shri. Harison Wakuram Momin i.e. the maternal uncle of the then Wakuram Nokma. Smt. Glimi Momin. After the death of (Late) Harison Wakuram Momin, the Garo members of the community appointed Shri. Neldison Wakuram Momin and Shri. Neldison Wakuram Momin was appointed temporarily as an agent due to the fact that at that particular point of time, no suitable persons of the Wakuram Clan could be found. 5. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No. 2, it is stated that the petitioner belongs to Gabel Clan and not the Wakuram Clan. The agent of the property belongs to the Clan is to be appointed from within the Clan. The petitioner being a member of another Clan i.e. Gabel Clan cannot be appointed as an agent of the property belongs to the Wakuram Clan. This fact is strenuously controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in past practices, the member of the Gabel Clan was also appointed as an agent of the property belongs to Wakhuram Clan as both the Clans i.e. Gabel Clan and Wakhuram Clan belong to the same Clan. As stated above, Mr. P.Nongbri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. L.Lyngdoh, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2, stated that the Gabel clan and Wakhuram clan are two separate Clans and also that there were inter-marriages between the members of the Wakhuram and Gabel Clans, as such, it is the case of respondents No. 1 & 2 that the Gabel clan and Wakhuram Clan are two separate Clans inasmuch as, there cannot be marriage between the members of the same Clan. In support of that contention, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents also placed the book “Principle of Garo Law” by Jangsan Sangma. 6. In support of that contention, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents also placed the book “Principle of Garo Law” by Jangsan Sangma. 6. From the pleadings of the parties as well as the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it is very clear that there are serious disputed question of facts (i) as to whether Wakhuram Clan and Gabel Clan belong to the same Clan?; (ii) as to whether the member of the Gabel Clan can be appointed as an agent of the property belongs to the Wakhuram Clan? and (iii) as to whether the petitioner can be appointed as an agent of the property belongs to Wakhuram Clan by the members of three clans or two clans? 7. The writ proceeding is not an appropriate forum for deciding the serious disputed question of facts. Mr. H.R.Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. P.Nongbri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. L.Lyngdoh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 stated that the appeal lies against the judgment and order of the Syiem/Chiefs to the Executive Committee, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Shillong. The learned counsel appearing for the parties also further contended that the Executive Committee, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council is quasi-judicial body inasmuch as, the Committee decided the case after taking into consideration of the evidences produced by the rival parties. 8. As the writ proceeding is not an appropriate forum to decide the serious disputed question of facts, it is left to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for his grievance against the impugned order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Syiem of Nongstoin. 9. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.