Ahongsangbam Dorendro and 9 Others v. Gyan Prakash and Another

O R D E R

27.02.2023 [1]

Heard Mr. D. Julius Riamei, learned counsel appearing for the applicants and Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA for the respondents. [2]

Mr. D. Julius Riamei, learned counsel appearing for the applicants represented that originally he has filed contempt application against the non compliance of the order dated 25.02.2022 passed by this Court in WP(C)No.1057 of 2018. [3]

When the writ petition has been filed, originally the Governing Body of Mayai Lambi College, Yumnam Huidrom and Thambal Marik College, Oinam were filed writ petition before this Court. Both the petitioners were filed writ petition seeking the prayer to quash the impugned order dated

20.10.2018 passed by the first respondent and to direct the respondents to JOHN TELEN KOM Date: 2023.03.02 09:20:47 +05'30'

allow the petitioners' function till the handing over and taking over of Mayai Lambi College, Yumnam Huidrom and Thambal Marik College, Oinam. [4]

Considering the petitioners' case in the writ petition, this Court passed order dated 25.02.2022 which read as follows:

"27. In the above circumstances,

(a) The writ petition is disposed of.

(b) The respondents Nos. 1 to 3 are hereby directed to absorb the 11(eleven) employees (Teaching Staff-5 and Non-teaching-6) of the Thambal Marik College, Oinam.

(c) The said exercise shall be done within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order."

[5]

Though this Court passed the above order in WP(C)No.1057 of 2018, 8(eight) weeks' time were granted to the respondents and the respondents were not complied the said order. Therefore, for violation of the said order dated 25.02.2022 passed in WP(C)No.1057 of 2018, these applicants who are numbering in 10(Ten) and the beneficiaries of the orders in the writ petition want to file contempt application before this Court. [6]

Since the writ petition was filed by the petitioners by namely the Mayai Lambi College, Yumnam Huidrom and Thambal Marik College, Oinam, these petitioners are individual as per the order granting the beneficiary to individuals only. Therefore, they prepared a contempt application in the name of individual numbering in 10(ten) and filing contempt application before this Court. When these applicants numbering in 10(ten) are not the parties in the writ petition, the rights of the applicants will be adversely affected if the order

dated 25.02.2018 in the writ petition is not complied with and for non-compliance, the applicants are filing contempt application. [7]

When the applicants in this MC(Cont.Cas(C))No.18 of 2023 are not the party in the proceedings, they should obtained proper leave of this Court for filing contempt application for non-compliance. [8]

Accordingly, the applicants are filed present application seeking to allow the present application by granting leave to file contempt application for compliance of the order dated 25.02.2022 passed by this Court in WP(C)No.1057 of 2018. Unless the leave is granted by this Court, irreparable loss would be caused to the applicants. Therefore, Mr. D. Julius Riamei, learned counsel appearing for the applicants prayed this Court to grant leave to these applicants to file contempt application. Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA for the State respondents made no objection. [9]

Considering the nature of the prayer sought for by the applicants, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders:

(a) This Misc. Case is allowed.

(b) Registry is directed to number the contempt application and post for admission.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE [[ John kom

Item No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(Cont.Cas(C))No.18 of 2023 Ahongsangbam Dorendro …Petitioner/s - Versus - Gyan Prakesh …Respondent/s BEFORE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN