WP(C) No. 40 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 34 of 2025 Item Nos. 3-4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 40 of 2025 RK. Priyabarta Singh. …Petitioner - Versus - State of Manipur & 2 Ors. …Respondents With MC(WP(C)) No. 34 of 2025 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA O R D E R 21-01-2025 [1] Heard Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 appearing through video conferencing. [2] The petitioner who was working as Chief Medical Officer (NFSG), Imphal was allotted Minister Flat No. 3 Babupara, Imphal and the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31-12-2024. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 28-10-2024 to the Estate Officer, Secretariat: Works Department, Government of Manipur for permission to stay in official residence even after retirement as his new house is still under construction. It is stated that the representation is still pending with the authority. [3] By the impugned order dated 18-12-2024, Government Quarter: Type-IV/3, Babupara has been allotted to respondent No. 3 and the petitioner prays for setting aside the impugned order dated 18-12-2024 issued by the authority and a direction to respondent No. 1 to grant six months’ time for vacating the premises. NINGOM BAM VICTORIA Digitally signed by NINGOMBAM VICTORIA Date: 2025.01.23 10:53:30 +05'30' WP(C) No. 40 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 34 of 2025 [4] On the other hand, Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned Government Advocate, submits that the writ petition has been filed on mere apprehension that the petitioner would be evicted from the official residence and no proceeding has been initiated under The Manipur Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1978. However, Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned counsel for the petitioner has clarified that with the issuance of the impugned order dated 18-12-2024, the petitioner is likely to be vacated at any time. Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned Government Advocate, submits that the writ petition may be disposed of by directing respondent No. 1 to dispose of the pending representation submitted by the petitioner within a stipulated time. [5] Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned counsel for the petitioner, has no objection provided the petitioner may not be evicted till the disposal of the representation. [6] Recording the submissions made at the Bar, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No. 1 to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of two months as per law. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be evicted during the pendency of the representation. [7] With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. It is clarified that this Court does not express any opinion on the merit of the case. [8] Furnish copy of this order to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. [9] The pending miscellaneous application is also disposed of in terms of the above direction. JUDGE Victoria