Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Manipur · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1926 (MAN)

Yumnam Nandini v. State of Manipur and 3 Ors

WP(C)/700/2025 · 2025-09-07

Ahanthem Bimol Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 Item No. 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP (C) No. 700 of 2025 Yumnam Nandini Petitioner Vs. State of Manipur; & 3 Ors. Respondents BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 08.09.2025 [1] Heard Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel assisted by Syed Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Th. Vashum, learned GA appearing for the respondents No. 1 & 2. [2] At the outset, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied for the time being if the present writ petition is disposed of by issuing a direction to the Principal Secretary (SCERT), Government of Manipur to consider the representation dated 04.09.2025 submitted by the petitioner on its own merit and strictly in terms of the applicable rules/guidelines and to disposal of the same by issuing a speaking order within a stipulated period. KABORA MBAM SAPANA CHANU Digitally signed by KABORAMBAM SAPANA CHANU Date: 2025.09.08 16:35:43 +05'30' Page 2 [3] Mr. Th. Vashum, learned GA appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that as the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner is confined to the consideration and disposal of the representation submitted by the petitioner, he has no objection in disposing of the present writ petition as prayed for by the learned senior counsel. [4] Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that it will be in the interest of justice to issue the following directions:- (1) The Principal Secretary (SCERT), Government of Manipur is hereby directed to consider the representation dated 04.09.2025 submitted by the petitioner on its own merit and strictly in terms of the applicable rules/guidelines and to dispose of the same by issuing a speaking order. (2) It is made clear that the whole process should be completed within a period of 1 month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Page 3 (3) It is further made clear that pending consideration and disposal of the said representation, status quo as on today in respect of the petitioner as well as the respondents No. 3 & 4 shall be maintained. [5] With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Sapana