Meghalaya HC: District administration cannot decide church's internal disputes

The Meghalaya High Court has held that a district administration cannot assume the role of an ecclesiastical tribunal to settle internal disputes within a church, while quashing orders restricting pastoral care and religious services at Mawkhar Presbyterian Church in Shillong.

Justice H S Thangkhiew, hearing a writ petition filed by the church, said the administration could take preventive steps to maintain public order but could not determine competing ecclesiastical rights or decide which Presbyterian synod had jurisdiction over the church.

“The existence of a dispute between two groups cannot, by itself, confer unlimited jurisdiction upon the executive authority to regulate the internal affairs of a religious denomination,” the court said in its order on Tuesday.

The dispute at Mawkhar Presbyterian Church dates back to 2019, when an unexplained deficit of around Rs 2.86 crore was detected. A subsequent audit reportedly found alleged misappropriation of about Rs 4.65 crore. An FIR was registered on August 3, 2019, in connection with an alleged fraud involving Rs 3.26 crore, according to the judgment.

The dispute later expanded to include the suspension and removal of pastor Reverend M Pyngrope and the church's affiliation with the Khasi Jaintia Presbyterian Synod Sepngi.

On February 1, 2026, the congregation passed a resolution seeking to dissociate itself from the Synod Sepngi. This triggered competing claims over the administration of the church and whether the KJP Synod Mihngi could provide pastoral care there.

Amid complaints, counter-complaints and criminal proceedings involving the rival groups, the East Khasi Hills district administration issued several directions restricting activities at the church.

These included restrictions on meetings at the church's schools, halls and premises, as well as directions against outside interference.

On June 19, the deputy commissioner specifically directed the KJP Synod Mihngi to stop providing pastoral care and administering sacraments at Mawkhar Presbyterian Church. The order relied on clarifications from the Presbyterian Church of India regarding ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

The High Court held that the deputy commissioner had exceeded his jurisdiction by making such a determination.

The court said the administration could not decide which synod had ecclesiastical authority merely by referring to the internal Constitution of the Presbyterian Church of India.

“It cannot conclusively determine which Synod possesses ecclesiastical jurisdiction merely by relying upon the internal Constitution of the Presbyterian Church of India,” the court observed.

The High Court consequently quashed the May 13 show-cause notice and the two orders issued on June 19, holding that they sought to determine or regulate ecclesiastical jurisdiction and religious functions.

It also set aside the March 12 directions and a May 8 communication to the extent that they imposed a blanket or indefinite restriction on the church's internal administration and functioning.

However, the court clarified that it was not ruling on the validity of the February 1 resolution, the appointment or removal of pastors or office bearers, the ecclesiastical jurisdiction claimed by either synod, or the rival claims over the management and control of the church.

The court said the authorities would continue to have the power to take lawful action where there was an actual or imminent threat to public peace, including violence, trespass, intimidation, destruction of property or other cognisable offences.

It also left the rival parties free to pursue their respective claims before competent ecclesiastical, civil or statutory forums.

The writ petition was accordingly partly allowed and disposed of.