In Re- Construction of Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai Vs The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary and 9 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

In Re- Construction of Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai Vs The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary and 9 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Public Interest Litigation closed and disposed of; earlier interim stay order dated 21.08.2025 vacated; Standing Counsel obliged to bring to the Court's notice any future hindrance in the passage caused by the construction.

Issue for consideration

Whether the construction of the Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai obstructs the ingress and egress from the Judicial Officers' quarters. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court accepted the State's assertion, affirmed by the District and Sessions Judge, Champhai (conveyed through the learned Standing Counsel), that the construction of the Working Women Hostel is confined to the covered area without causing any hindrance to the passage from the Judicial Officers' quarters.

Ratio / Principle

Since no hindrance to the passage was found, the Court held it unnecessary to continue the Public Interest Litigation and closed the petition.

Key takeaways

The earlier interim (stay) order stands vacated.ratio¶39
If the construction causes any hindrance in the passage even later, the Standing Counsel (Mr. Malhotra) is obligated to bring that fact to the notice of the Court.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL(Suo Moto)/2/2025), Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ and Michael Zothankhuma, J; decided 12.06.2026), initiated on the complaint of the District and Sessions Judge, Champhai, alleging that the ongoing construction of the Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai blocked the only entrance to the Judicial Officers' quarters and would consume a boxing ring. Construction had been stayed by order dated 21.08.2025; permission to continue was thereafter granted subject to no obstruction of the passage. On the State's affidavit dated 11.06.2026 with annexed photographs, corroborated by the District and Sessions Judge through the learned Standing Counsel, the Court recorded that construction was confined to the covered area without hindering ingress and egress, found it unnecessary to continue the proceedings, vacated the interim order, closed and disposed of the petition, while obliging the Standing Counsel to apprise the Court of any future hindrance in the passage.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC030005452025

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : PIL(Suo Moto)/2/2025

In Re- Construction of Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai Mizoram.

VERSUS

1.The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary and 9 Ors, Aizawl, Mizoram.

2:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Public Works Dept.

3:The Engineer in Chief Public Works Dept. Govt. of Mizoram

4:The Chief Engineer Building Public Works Dept.

5:The Chief Architect

Office of the Engineer-in-Chief Public Works Dept.

6:The Superintending Engineer Other Department Circle Public Works Dept.

7:The Executive Engineer Project Division-III Public Works Dept.

8:The Deputy Commissioner Champhai

9:The Superintendent of Police Champhai

10:R.Z. Construction R/b Richard Vanlaltanpui

Page No.# 2/4

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.R. Mahlhotra, Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte, Additional Advocate General, Mizoram.

– BEFORE –

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

12.06.2026

(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

We have heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned Standing Counsel, Gauahti High Court, Aizawl Bench for the petitioner and Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte, Additional Advocate General, Mizoram.

Pursuant to a complaint made by the District and Sessions Judge, Champhai Judicial District, Champhai with respect to the ongoing construction of Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai, which apparently was blocking the only entrance to the quarters of the Judicial Officers, the matter was taken up suo motu on such a complaint.

During the course of hearing of the matter, it transpired that the building which is being constructed would consume a boxing ring and would also be an obstruction to the ingress and egress from the Judicial Officers’ quarters. As such, initially, a stay order was granted by this Court on 21.08.2025 stopping all construction activities till the issue was resolved.

In the meantime, an Interlocutory Application was filed on behalf of the State through the learned Advocate General, who sought modification/rescinding the order of stay dated 21.08.2025 passed in this

Page No.# 3/4

case.

It was contended that a Scheme for construction of the Working Women Hostel had been framed, which would consume the building/used as boxing ring, but it would not cause any obstruction in the ingress and egress from the Judicial Officers’ quarters.

Based on such statement, permission was granted for continuing with the construction, subject to the condition that such construction ought not to cause any obstruction in the passage.

Today, learned Additional Advocate General, Mizoram has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed on 11.06.2026 intimating this Court about the status of the construction of the Working Women Hostel and a categorical statement that such construction is within the limited covered area without causing any hindrance in the ingress and egress of the Judicial Officers’ quarters located nearby.

In support of the afore-noted assertion, photographs also have been annexed with the affidavit.

Mr. Malhotra, learned Standing Counsel, GHC, AB submits that he had consultations with the District and Sessions Judge, Champhai, who has also affirmed the afore-noted assertion of the State that the construction of the Working Women Hostel is only in the covered area without causing any hindrance to the passage from the Judicial Officers’ quarters.

In that view of the matter, we do not consider it necessary now to continue with this Public Interest Litigation any further.

Page No.# 4/4

This Petition is thus closed.

In case of the construction causing any hindrance in the passage, even later, would obligate Mr. Malhotra to bring such fact to the notice of this Court.

The earlier Interim order thus stands vacated.

With the afore-noted observation, this petition stands disposed

off.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

Comparing Assistant