GHADC Budget Session Marred by Allegations of Financial Irregularities and Forgery

Questions over a Rs 23.60 lakh payment to a Delhi-based firm and a proposed Rs 200 crore loan led to allegations of financial irregularities and forgery during the second day of Meghalaya’s Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC) budget session . Raising the issue during Question Hour, MDC Rinaldo K. Sangma sought an explanation from the Executive Committee over the payment made from GHADC funds to Lexi Corp LLP in 2025. Official documents showed that the firm received Rs 20 lakh initially, followed by another Rs 3.60 lakh as professional fees. Citing financial records, Rinaldo said no expenditure was reflected under Budget Grant No. 12 for Loans and Grants, where the entry remained “Nil”. He further alleged that Lexi Corp LLP was involved in arranging the proposed Rs 200 crore loan. Deputy Chief Executive Member (CEM) Stevie M. Marak placed before the House the minutes of an earlier Executive Committee meeting and alleged that former CEM Albinush R. Marak and former Deputy CEM Nikman Ch. Marak had attempted to commit the Council to the loan proposal without the knowledge of the Executive Committee. According to Stevie, approval of the proposal would have made the GHADC responsible for repaying Rs 200 crore. He also alleged that official records of the Executive Committee meeting were altered, claiming that his attendance was falsely recorded despite him not being present. He said he would initiate a forgery case. Responding to the allegations, Nikman said Lexi Corp LLP had been engaged by the former CEM in his personal capacity and was not an entity of the GHADC. Stevie, however, presented documents that, according to him, listed the former CEM and former Deputy CEM as the first directors of the company on behalf of the Council. Questioning the payment, Stevie asked why GHADC funds amounting to Rs 23.60 lakh were given to the firm, stating that the District Council was not a private entity. He also sought details on who approved the payment and demanded that the amount be recovered from the former CEM and former Deputy CEM. Opposition members also sought accountability over the payment, the loan proposal and the alleged manipulation of official records during the session.