Item no. 3 & 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL W.P. (C) No. 683 of 2025 with MC(W.P. (C)) No. 641 of 2025 Ningthoujam Sunil Singh … Petitioner - Versus - State of Manipur and 3 Ors. … Respondents B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA ORDER 01.09.2025 [1] Heard Mr. N. Bupenda Meitei, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Debendra, learned Dy. AG assisted by Ms. I. Sharmila, learned jr. GA for the State respondents. [2] By the present petition, the petitioner approached this Court challenging the impugned Appeal dated 20.07.2025 issued by Deputy Commissioner, Imphal East informing that all the encroachers over Govt. land of Imphal East district to remove the structures upon the allege encroached portion otherwise, Govt. will take up eviction and demolition. [3] The petitioner submits that he is an owner of homestead land with Patta No. 582/590, C.S. Dag No. 1264 of a Revenue Village 27-Wangkhei Nongpok for the last 42 years. [4] By the impugned Appeal issued by DC, Imphal East, the petitioner has an apprehension that he may be evicted from his Patta land. In this regard, he submitted a common representation dated 25.08.2025 to the 1) Hon’ble Governor of Manipur, 2) Chief Secretary, Govt. of Manipur, 3) Secretary to Governor of Manipur, 4) Commissioner/ Secretary, Revenue, Govt. of Manipur & 5) Deputy Commissioner, Imphal East District regarding the impugned Appeal OINAM THOIB A MEITEI Digitally signed by OINAM THOIBA MEITEI Date: 2025.09.01 17:41:15 +05'30' dated 20.07.2025 issued by DC, Imphal East is without any authority and for cancellation of the same. It is submitted that his representation is pending in the above mentioned authority. [5] On the other hand, Mr. H. Debendra, Dy. AG submits that in the present mass eviction drive, Govt. has not evicted anybody from patta land and no structure is demolished within the patta land and if, the petitioner patta is genuine, he should not have apprehension of the eviction drive and it is also submitted that since, the State authority has not issued any specific order of eviction or demolition against the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition is pre-matured. [6] This Court has considered the submissions made at the bar and the contentions in the writ petition. This Court is of the opinion that the writ petition may be disposed at this stage by observing that if, the petitioner is in possession of the above said property as a genuine patta land, he should not have any apprehension of being evicted or demolition of the structure. However, in case of any encroachments, State Govt. may take appropriate steps as per rule after giving opportunity of being heard. [7] With these observations, the present W.P. (C) No. 683 of 2025 and MC(W.P. (C)) No. 641 of 2025 are disposed of. JUDGE Thoiba