Laishram Sanjoy Singh v. State of Manipur and 3 Others

Order

17.01.2024

MC(WP(C) No. 461 of 2023: [1]

Heard Mr. M. Gunedhor, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner. [2]

Vide order dated 29.01.2021 in WP(C) No. 71 of 2021, it was directed to maintain status quo as on date and the interim order is extended from time to time. The petitioner, who is a Constable in Manipur Police Department, was kept under suspension and by the interim order, status quo was maintained. In view of the interim order dated 29.01.2021, the proposed departmental enquiry was also kept pending. [3]

Mr. M. Gunedhor, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner, draws the attention of this Court to the common order dated 29.11.2023 passed by this Court in the batch of petitions where this Court clarified that there will be no bar on the State Government in passing any order with respect to revocation of suspension order of the petitioners therein in spite of existence of the interim order. [3]

By the present application, the petitioner is also praying for the same relief and he is also similarly situated person. [4]

Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned G.A. for the State respondent, submits that this Court may pass appropriate order in terms of the common order dated 29.11.2023 passed by this Court. [5]

Considering the submissions made at the bar and perused the materials on record, it is clarified that the existence of the interim order dated 29.01.2021 in WP(C) No. 71 of 2021, there is no bar on the State respondents in passing any appropriate order with respect to revocation of the suspension order. [6]

With this observation, application is disposed of.

WP(C) No. 10 of 2023: [7]

Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in the cause title at page 2 of the petition, respondent No. 3 is wrongly type as "Superintendent of Police, Imphal West" in place of correct one "Superintendent of Police, Imphal East". He submits that the nature of the case will not change by correcting the same. [8]

Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned G.A. for the State respondent, submits that it will be proper to file an appropriate application in this regard. [9]

Considering the fact that the correction is only one line in the cause title. This Court considered the oral submission of Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel for the petitioner and he is permitted to make necessary correction with respect to respondent No. 3 in the Court copy as well as other copies subject to payment of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) to the High Court Bar Association. [10]

List the remaining cases on 09.02.2024.

JUDGE

joshua

KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2024.01.18 10:36:35 +05'30'

Item No. 37-63 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 10 of 2023 with MC(WP(C) No. 461 of 2023 with WP(C) No. 109 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 125 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 177 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 187 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 205 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 270 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 329 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 359 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 365 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 366 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 386 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 401 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 406 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 602 of 2020 with WP(C) No. 605 of 2020 with WP(C) No. 619 of 2020 with WP(C) No. 660 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 662 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 71 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 746 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 77 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 78 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 80 of 2021 with WP(C) No. 811 of 2022 with WP(C) No. 93 of 2023 PH. Rizwan …..Petitioner/s - Versus – State of Manipur & 3 Ors. .... Respondent/s BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA