Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 180 (MEG)

Sngewbhalin Paliar v. State of Meghalaya

2022-07-08

H.S.THANGKHIEW

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners by way of this writ petition have approached this Court seeking directions to direct the respondents more particularly the respondent No. 3 and 5 for allocation of daily wage work under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS). The brief facts as submitted is that the petitioners who are the residents of the village known as Umwali Vilalge, West Khasi Hills are in possession of Job Cards under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, which ensure them of sustainable employment and which provides payment of daily wages. 2. It has been contended by the writ petitioners that they have been deprived of the benefits of the Scheme as the respondent No. 5 had engaged machinery to execute some works, for which a complaint had been filed before the respondent No. 3. It is further submitted that an enquiry had been gone into by the respondent No. 4, the Additional Programme Officer, C&RD Block Mawshynrut, West Khasi Hills, with regard to the situation in the village vis-à-vis the petitioners, and that a copy of the enquiry report dated 22.11.2019 was made available to the writ petitioner No. 1, by way of an RTI application. 3. Ms. A. Kharshiing, learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the said enquiry report which is appended at Annexure-5 of the writ petition, and submits that the report indicates that the writ petitioner and another person were deprived of the daily wages as they were not following the conditions as laid down by the village, and further that the Enquiry Officer had advocated for settlement of the dispute amicably. 4. Mr. H. Kharmih, learned Addl. Sr. GA for the respondent No. 1 to 4 has referred to the proceedings of a meeting held under the Chairmanship of the respondent No. 3, held at Umwali Village on the 20.11.2019, and submits that the reason that the petitioners have been deprived of work is because of their holding dual Job Cards i.e. one Job Card from Mawshynrut C&RD Block and another from Ranikor C&RD Block. He further submits that this fact has been verified on examination of the Muster Roll register taken from Ranikor C&RD Block. 5. In reply to this contention, Ms. He further submits that this fact has been verified on examination of the Muster Roll register taken from Ranikor C&RD Block. 5. In reply to this contention, Ms. A. Kharshiing, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to the rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners, indicating that the petitioner No. 1 after her marriage has settled with her husband at his village i.e. Umwali Village and that the Sordar of Mawtaiem had been intimated to delete her name from the Job Card, Ration Card and other related documents, as she is no longer a resident of the said village. The learned counsel further submits that in spite of the intimation, and even in spite of the application dated 25.06.2019, being submitted to the BDO, Ranikor C&RD Block for removal of her name, the same was not acted upon. A series of correspondences regarding this fact which have been annexed to the rejoinder affidavit, are referred to by the learned counsel. 6. Mr. M.L. Nongpiur, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5, (Dorbar Shnong of Umwali Village) submits that the only impediment which is before the Dorbar is the fact that it is not clear as to the status of the petitioners, as they are holding dual Job Cards and if the same is not resolved, the Dorbar will not be in a position to grant any work under the Scheme in Umwali Village to them. He fairly submits that in case the matter is resolved and if the Job Cards, Ration Cards are deleted from Mataiem Village, there will be no hindrance for the Dorbar to act accordingly and to allow the petitioners to take part in the Scheme and to avail daily wages therefrom. 7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the materials on record, especially the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioners. The entire situation seems to have arisen due to the non-clarity as to the status of the writ petitioners as on enquiry it was found that they were still holding dual Job Cards, Ration Cards from Mawtaiem Village under Ranikor C&RD Block. The entire situation seems to have arisen due to the non-clarity as to the status of the writ petitioners as on enquiry it was found that they were still holding dual Job Cards, Ration Cards from Mawtaiem Village under Ranikor C&RD Block. It is noticed from the documents as placed on record, such as the enquiry report, proceedings of the meeting under the Chairmanship of the BDO and the subsequent documents annexed to the rejoinder affidavit, that the petitioners had been deprived of the benefits under the Scheme, through no fault of theirs. Further it is noted, the petitioner No. 1 had taken due care to get her name deleted from her village, for which she had even received a No-Objection Certificate from the village Dorbar of Mawtaiem. The difficulties that the petitioners had been put through can be ascribed to the non-deletion of their names from Mawtaiem Village, which on being clarified should not post any further hindrance or obstruction for them being granted the benefits under the Scheme in Umwali Village. 8. In this view of the matter, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, and as per the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent No. 5, it is directed that the respondent No. 3 shall ensure that the petitioners be allowed to avail the benefits of the Scheme under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act. The respondent No. 5 shall allow the petitioners to work and they are to disregard the earlier Job Cards, Ration Cards issued by Mawtaiem Village. It is further directed that the respondent No. 3 shall communicate the same to his counterpart at Ranikor C&RD Block, so that such confusion no longer arises. The respondent No. 5 is also directed to ensure that the petitioners are not discriminated against in any manner or deprived of any benefits or occupation. 9. For the foregoing observations and directions, this writ petition stands closed and is accordingly disposed of.