Suppl. Item No. 1-2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 997 of 2025 with MC(WP(C) No. 916 of 2025 Ngasepam Rajen & 8 Ors. …..Petitioner/s - Versus – State of Manipur & 2 Ors. .... Respondent/s BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 18.12.2025 [1] Present Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Roshan, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. H. Debendra, learned Dy. A.G. assisted by Mr. A. Bheigya, learned Jr. G.A. for the State respondent. [2] The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 05.12.2025 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lamsang in exercise of powers conferred under Section 15 of the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Manipur Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1978 directing them and others in all 25 (twenty five) pattadars/encroachers to remove all their structures by 15.12.2025 failing which the pattadars/encroachers/owners should be evicted from the premises under their occupation. [3] Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners have also preferred an appeal against the impugned order dated 05.12.2025 before the Administrative Secretary (Land Resources), Government of Manipur on 15.12.2025. It is also submitted that as the time line for removal of the structures is also 15.12.2025, the petitioners in abundant caution have also filed the present writ petition against the same impugned order dated 05.12.2025 on 15.12.2025. [4] On 16.12.2025 when the matter was taken up at motion hearing, learned Dy. A.G., due to paucity of time, could not take instruction. Today, it is submitted that the petitioners have approached two forums, one in appeal under Section 6 of the Manipur Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1978 before the appellate authority as well as before this Court by way of present writ petition challenging the notice for eviction order dated 05.12.2025 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lamsang. [5] Learned Dy. A.G. submits that since two parallel proceedings are pending to two different Courts against the same impugned order and the petitioners may choice one of the proceeding for proceeding accordingly. [6] Issue notice to the limited point as to whether the petitioners will avail appellate forum or the writ proceeding before the writ Court. [7] Mr. A. Bheigya, learned Jr. G.A. accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents. Hence, service is complete. [8] At this stage, Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, on instruction, submits that the petitioners prefer to pursue the proceeding before the appellate authority and as such, the writ petition may be disposed of by directing the appellate authority to consider the pending appeal filed by the petitioners as per law and within a specified period. [9] With the alternative prayer of the petitioners, it is submitted by the learned Dy. A.G. that if the petitioners desire so, they may pursue the proceeding before the appellate authority. [10] In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the appellate authority to consider the appeal filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible in terms of the applicable law. The petitioners may approach the appellate authority for any interim relief, if desired so. [11] With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Misc. application is also disposed of. JUDGE Kh. Joshua Maring KH. JOSHUA MARING Digitally signed by KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2025.12.19 15:31:42 +05'30'