Bikram Wangkheimayum v. State of Manipur and 4 Others
WP(C)/613/2025 · 2025-08-11
A Guneshwar Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1706 (MAN) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1706 (MAN) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Suppl. (1) Item no. 9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
W.P. (C) No. 613 of 2025
Bikram Wangkheimayum … Petitioner - Versus –
State of Manipur and 4 Ors. … Respondents
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
ORDER 12.08.2025
[1] Heard Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned sr. counsel assisted by Ms. Kh. Maria, learned counsel for the petitioner. [2] Mrs. Ch. Sundari, learned GA on behalf of the respondent no. 1 and Mr. S. Kaminikumar, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 5. [3] By the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for release of a sum of Rs. 9,61,477/- (Rupees nine lakhs sixty one thousand four hundred seventy seven) for making architectural and structural design for the respondents and the bill is still pending. [4] In this regard, the petitioner has already sent legal notice dated 14.10.2024 for releasing the said due bill amount to the respondents and the same is still pending. [5] At this stage, the learned sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 14.10.2024 and verifying the genuineness of the claim amount of the petitioner and directed due payment may be made. [6] The learned counsel for the respondents are agreeable to the proposal for disposing of the writ petition by passing innocuous order. OINAM THOIBA MEITEI Digitally signed by OINAM THOIBA MEITEI Date: 2025.08.12 18:39:47 +05'30'
[7] Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 14.10.2025 and verifying the genuineness of the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. [8] It is made clear that this Court doesn’t express any opinion on the merit of the case. [9] With these observations, the present W.P. (C) No. 613 of 2025 is
disposed of.
JUDGE
Thoiba