1 | P a g e Sl. No. 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL Cont. Cas(C) No. 68 of 2018 Ref:- WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 Dr. Chirom Nishita Devi Petitioner Vs. Dr. J. Suresh Babu, IAS Respondent BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. KEMPAIAH SOMASHEKAR ORDER 31.07.2025 [1] This contempt case has been filed by the complainant under the relevant provision of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for seeking intervention for disobedience of the order rendered by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 dated 04.11.2015. [2] The learned counsel Ms. Geetarani Waikhom representing Mr. Ng. Jotindra Luwang who is on record for the complainant/petitioner is present and wherein the said counsel in this matter is submitting that the compliance order had issued by the Government of Manipur i.e. Secretary/Veterinary and Animal Husbandry dated 23rd October, 2024 and even though the orders rendered by the learned Single Judge on the writ side in WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 dated 04.11.2015 has not been complied with. SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL SHARMA Digitally signed by SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL SHARMA Date: 2025.08.07 14:40:14 +05'30' 2 | P a g e [3] On the contrary, the learned counsel Mr. Juno Rahman for the respondent No. 7; learned senior counsel Mr. M. Devananda assisted by Ms. N. Jyotsana, learned counsel for the respondents No. 8 and 9; Mr. U. Augusta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4; Mr. L. Rajesh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and inclusive of learned senior GA Mr. Sh. Yangya for the respondent No.1 respectively submitted that the order was passed by the Government of Manipur, Department of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry dated 23.10.2024 in compliance of the court’s order and that order consisting in all para No. 1 to para No. 18 wherein the counsel for the respondents in respect of that order had specifically submitted that in respect of para No. 11 that whereas the Committee was formed vide Government order No. 1/8/2015-Vety dated 06.08.2018 which reads thus : “11. Whereas, the Committee formed Vide Govt. Order No. 1/8/2015-Vety dated 6/8/2018 under the Chairman of Director, Vety. & A.H., Manipur for verification of the service period from 1/10/2001 to 23.9.2005 and 24.3.2006 to 23.12.2013 in respect of the above 12 ad hoc V.Os, regularised w.e.f 24.12.2013 in pursuance of DP's OM No.2/52011- Adhoc/DP dated 31.10.2013, has specifically mentioned that the Committee found that though formal order for the petitioners were not issued from 01.10.2001 to 23.09.2005 and 24.03.2006 to 23.12.2013 in respect of Vety. Officers at SI. Nos. 1 to 11 and 08.09.2001 to 13.09.2005 and 24.03.2006 to 23.12.2013 in respect of Vety. Officer at Sl. No. 12. However, they continued in service and discharged duties during these periods by virtue of Hon'ble High 3 | P a g e Court orders. Thus, the conditions of the OM no.2/5/2011-Adhoc/DP dated 3rd October 2013 issued by the Department of Personnel & AR(Personnel Division), GoM was not fully satisfied when the petitioners were regularised.” [4] Apart from that, the counsel for the respondents is pressing for consideration of para No. 18 that now, therefore, from the record, petitioners have been paid their wages amounting to Rs. 58,65,196/- (Rupees Fifty-eight lakhs sixty-five thousand one hundred ninety-six) for the period of their adhoc service extension orders were issued by the Government. However, for the period from 01.04.2006, there is no record of adhoc service extension by the Government and thereby they are not entitled their wages after 2006. [5] This order is issued in compliance of the orders rendered by the learned Single Judge on the writ side in WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 and also WP(C) No. 294 of 2016. [6] In the meanwhile of referring the order dated 23.10.2024 for compliance of the orders in WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 dated 04.11.2015 and whereby the learned counsel for the complainant has referred to Annexure- C/8 of the proceedings of the Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 11646/2011 arising out of the impugned final judgment and order dated 15.04.2021 in Writ Appeal No. 30/2019 passed by the High Court of Manipur at Imphal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India made an observation that we do not find any ground to interfere with the order impugned. The Special 4 | P a g e Leave Petition is dismissed. Pending applications stand disposed of. However, in the peculiar situation as prevalent in the State of Manipur, we observe that the direction as issued by the leaned Single Judge and the Division Bench be now carry out by the State within the period of six months. [7] However, the compliance order dated 23.10.2024 reveals that orders rendered by the learned Single Judge on the writ side in WP(C) No. 749 of 2015 and so also the proceeding in WP(C) No. 294 of 2016 has been complied with. [8] Therefore, keeping in view the compliance order dated 23.10.2024 are concerned, it is deemed appropriate that the contempt case does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, this contempt petition is hereby closed. [9] However, the learned counsel for the complainant is present before the court physically whereby the said counsel in this matter is seeking some sort of liberty. [10] Liberty is granted and it is in accordance with law. CHIEF JUSTICE Sushil