Page 1 Item No. 84 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP (C) No. 577 of 2023 Huidrom (O) Panjita Devi; & Anr. Petitioners Vs. State of Manipur; & 2 Ors. Respondents BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 10.04.2025 [1] Heard Ms. L. Sanjeeka Devi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA appearing for the respondents. [2] It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that on the expiry of one (L) H. Sanatomba Singh, who was serving as Peon, on 13.12.2007, the petitioner No. 1, who is the wife of the deceased Government employee, submitted a representation dated 02.04.2008 to the Secretary (Law), Government of Manipur with a request for considering her case for appointment against any suitable post commensurate with her educational qualification under the die-in-harness scheme. Subsequently, the petitioner No. 1 again submitted another representation dated 18.07.2023 to the Commissioner (Law), Government of Manipur with a request for change of the applicant for appointment under the die-in-harness scheme and KABORA MBAM SAPANA CHANU Digitally signed by KABORAMBAM SAPANA CHANU Date: 2025.04.10 15:32:45 +05'30' Page 2 requesting the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner No. 2, who happens to be the 2nd daughter of the petitioner No. 1 and the deceased Government employee, for considering her case for appointment under the die-in-harness scheme against any suitable post commensurate with her educational qualification on the ground that the petitioner No. 1 has become over age. The learned counsel further submitted that the said 2 representations are still pending for consideration and disposal by the concerned authorities of the Government. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioners will be satisfied for the time being, if the present writ petition is disposed of by issuing a simple direction to the Secretary/Commissioner (Law) to consider the aforesaid 2 representations submitted by the petitioner No. 1 on its own merit and strictly in terms of the applicable guidelines and to dispose of the same by issuing appropriate order within a stipulated period. [3] Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that as the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners is confined to the consideration and disposal of the representation submitted by the petitioner No. 1, he has no objection in disposing of the present writ petition as prayed for by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. [4] Taking into consideration, the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the Page 3 record, this Court is satisfied that the interests of justice will be served by issuing the following directions:- (1) The Commissioner/Secretary (Law), Government of Manipur is hereby directed to consider the representations dated 02.04.2008 and 18.07.2023 submitted by the petitioner No. 1 on its own merit and strictly in terms of the applicable guidelines and to dispose of the same by issuing appropriate order. (2) The whole exercise should be completed within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. [5] With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Sapana