Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Manipur · body

2025 DAILYLAW 476 (MAN)

K Cheiraojao Kom v. State of Manipur and another

WP(C)/57/2025 · 2025-05-12

A Guneshwar Sharma

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP(C) No. 57 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 48 of 2025 Suppl. Item Nos. 3-4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(WP(C)) No. 48 of 2025 With WP(C) No. 57 of 2025 K. Cheiraojao Kom. …Petitioner - Versus - State of Manipur & Anr. …Respondents B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA O R D E R 13-05-2025 [1] Heard Mr. K. Modhusudon, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Debendra, learned Dy. Advocate General assisted by Ms. Thanyomi Keishing, learned counsel for the State respondents. [2] The petitioner who is the Chief of Kakching Mantak/Mantak village approached this Court for issuance of Scheduled Tribe Certificates/ Residential Certificates/Domicile Certificates, etc. which are required by the villagers for admission, employment and availing various schemes of the State and Central Government. It is stated that due to dispute as to whether Kakching Mantak falls within the jurisdiction of Chandel District or Kakching District, the certificates sought for have not been issued by the competent authorities. [3] Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relies on certain documents of census of various years where apparently Kakching Mantak is shown in the Chandel District. WP(C) No. 57 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 48 of 2025 [4] On the other hand, Mr. H. Debendra, learned Dy. Advocate General for the State respondents, draws the attention of this Court that the Gazette Notification dated 29-10-1979 where 84-Mantak village is shown in the Kakching Circle and after bifurcation of Thoubal District into Thoubal and Kakching, the jurisdiction of Mantak Village will fall in Kakching. [5] On 04-04-2025, on the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wanted only certificates such as Scheduled Tribe Certificates/Domicile Certificates, etc. for the purpose of admission, employment and availing various Government schemes, this Court, without going into the merit of the case, passed an order which are reproduced below:— “[11] The limited prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of certificates such as Schedule Tribe, Permanent Residential Certificate, etc. in the interest of villagers, especially the students for taking admission and any other purpose. [12] This Court is of the view that the boundary dispute as to whether Kakching Mantak village falls within Chandel or Kakching district, shall not be an impediment to the Mantak villagers in having necessary certificate as prayed for. ………………………………… ………………………………… [15] The State respondent may submit its view as to whether who will be the authority for issuing these certificates till boundary issue of Mantak village is settled. It is made clear that any such arrangement will be without prejudice to the rights of any party.” [6] This Court observes that in paras 11 & 12 of the above mentioned order, the prayer is limited for issuance of certificates as prayed for and this Court does not express any opinion as to whether Kakching Mantak falls within the Chandel District or Kakching District. WP(C) No. 57 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 48 of 2025 [7] In view of the nature of the dispute and the limited prayer prayed for by the petitioner and the opinion of the State respondents, the Deputy Commissioner, Kakching or any officer authorized by the State Government, may be directed to issue certificates to the villagers of Kakching Mantak. [8] Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing Deputy Commissioner, Kakching or any officer authorized by the State Government to issue certificates such as Scheduled Tribe Certificates/Residential Certificates/Domicile Certificates, etc. to the villagers of Kakching Mantak. [9] It is made clear that this direction would not affect the rights of the parties in the dispute as to whether Kakching Mantak falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Chandel District or Kakching District. The parties may approach appropriate forum for their grievances. [10] With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. [11] MC(WP(C)) No. 48 of 2025 is also disposed of. JUDGE Victoria NINGOM BAM VICTORIA Digitally signed by NINGOMBAM VICTORIA Date: 2025.05.14 11:01:47 +05'30'