Minot Syngkli v. State of Meghalaya and 5 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶1The petitioner, who is stated to be the second wife of one (Late) Shri. Reshman Lapang, who died in harness on 09-05-2019 while serving in the Police Department, is before this Court praying for directions for issuance of the Pension and Payment Order (PPO) in her favour, and also for other terminal benefits as payable.

¶2Mr. S.D.Upadhaya, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the deceased employee had a first wife who has been arrayed as respondent No. 6, represented by Mr. B.Khyriem, learned counsel, who had filed an application for grant of the Succession Certificate before the District Council Court. The matter, he submits, had culminated in the judgment dated 04-05-2023, whereby the respondent No. 6 was allowed the said benefits and family pension.

¶3Thereafter, the petitioner had approached the authorities for grant of 50% of the family pension and other dues, and later came to learn that the PPO had already been issued in favour of the respondent No. 6. The petitioner, he submits, then approached the District Council Court for further reliefs, and thereafter, a compromise was arrived at between the petitioner and the respondent No. 6 which has been recorded in the order dated 13-05-2025, passed in Misc. Case No. 31 of 2025 in Succession Case No. 34 of 2021. However, inspite of the Deed of Compromise, he submits that the respondent No. 4 had issued the impugned letter dated 04-08-2025, wherein it was stated that the PPO could not be issued in the absence of any judgment and order to that effect. As such, he submits, the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court.

¶4Mr. K.Kharmawphlang, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 has submitted that the family pension in respect of Shri. (Late) Reshman

Lapang, could not be released to the petitioner on the strength of the Deed of Compromise in the absence of any other judgment and order. He however, submits that since the parties have reached a compromise, the matter can be disposed of at this stage itself by issuing directions based on the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶5Mr. B.Khyriem, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 has also concurred to the submissions, and has submitted that the respondent No. 6, who is the first wife of the deceased employee, has waived off all her rights and claims to the family pension and other terminal benefits to the writ petitioner.

¶6Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and also examined the materials on record, this Court has also examined the order dated 13-05-2025, passed by the District Council Court wherein it has been given as follows: "IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, DISTRICT COUNCIL COURT, AT SHILLONG.

Misc. Case No. 31 of 2025 In S.C. No. 34 of 2021

Smti. Minot Syngkli

….Applicant

-Versus-

Smti. Iadalin Thangkhiew .…Opposite Party

Date of order: The 13th May, 2025

ORDER

C.R. put up today for modification of judgment dt 4/5/2023 passed in S/C Misc Case No 34 of 2021.

Based upon the Deed of Compromise dt 25 day of October 2023, it is found that the petitioner and the opposite party have agreed to some fresh settlement apart from the judgment dated 4/5/2023 passed by the court in S/C Misc Case No. 34 of 2021. In view of the Deed of compromise dt 25/10/2023 the modification order is hereby passed as under:

¶1The First Party Smti ladalin Thangkhiew shall have to waive her right to receive the family pension payable to the family of (L) Reshman Lapang.

¶2The Second party Smti Minot Syngkli shall hereby receive the entire family pension of (L) Reshman Lapang.

¶3The Second Party shall not claim the benefits which the First Party had received the gratuity leave encashment and other dues as well as the family pension which she had received till the date of the execution of the Deed of compromise dt 25/10/2024.

In the meantime the concerned authorities are directed to issued the Pension Book in favour of the First party/ petitioner/ Smti Minot Syngkli.

This Misc case shall form part and parcel of S/C case No 34 of 21 and Execution case no 2 of 2024.

This Misc case is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/- Smti. S.B.Laitthma Judge, District Council Court, Shillong."

¶7This Court has also perused the impugned order dated 04-08-2025, passed by the Accounts Officer of the respondent No. 4, with respect to the family pension.

¶8In these circumstances of the case, inasmuch as, the parties have executed a Deed of compromise, this Court feels that there should be no impediment for allowing the Deed of Compromise to be acted upon by the respondent No. 4 in issuance of necessary Pension Payment Orders in favour of the writ petitioner.

¶9Accordingly, it is ordered that the respondent No. 4 shall process the issuance of PPO and payment of terminal benefits as entitled to the writ petitioner expeditiously.

¶10Matter stands closed and disposed of.

Judge

Date: 2026.05.13 18:10:52 IST

Serial No.11 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C). No. 590 of 2025 Date of Decision: 13.05.2026 Smti. Minot Syngkli W/o (L) Reshman Lapang R/o Umkadhor, Patharkhmah Nongkhlaw Syiemship, Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya. …Petitioner -Versus- 1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Meghalaya Secretariat Building, Shillong: 793001. 2. Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Department of Home (Police), Meghalaya Secretariat Building, Shillong-793001. 3. Directorate General of Police, Meghalaya, Shillong-793001 4. Principal Accountant General (A&E), Meghalaya, Shillong-793001 5. Commandant, 4th MLP (2nd IR) Battalion, Sohpian, Nongstoin, District: West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya. 6. Smti ladalin Thangkhiew W/o (L) Reshman Lapang R/o Patharkhmah, Nangkhlaw Syiemship, Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya. …Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.D.Upadhaya, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A..M.Pala, GA for R 1-3 & 5. Mr. K.Kharmawphlang, Adv. with Ms. E.B.Passah, Adv. for R 4. Mr. B.Khyriem, Adv. for R 6. i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: