Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Manipur · body

2025 DAILYLAW 82 (MAN)

THOUDAM HEMCHANDRA SINGH v. STATE OF MANIPUR AND 4 OTHERS

MC(WP(C))/756/2025 · 2026-02-23

Ahanthem Bimol Singh

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 Item Nos. 74 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(WP(C)) No. 756 of 2025 [Ref: WP(C) No. 952 of 2018] Thoudam Hemchandra Singh …Applicant/s Vrs. State of Manipur & 4 Ors …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 24.02.2026 [1] Mr. Rendy M., learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant/petitioner; Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 1; Mr. Albert Keisham, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent nos. 2 & 3; and Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent no. 4. [2] The present application has been filed with a prayer for allowing impleadment of the following officers as respondent nos. 5, 6 & 7 respectively; (i) the Principal Secretary/ Commissioner/ Secretary (Finance), Government of Manipur; (ii) the Principal Secretary/ Commissioner/ Secretary (DP), Government of Manipur; and (iii) the Director of Forest and Environment, Government of Manipur. Lucy Gurum ayum Digitally signed by Lucy Gurumayum Date: 2026.02.24 15:40:52 +05'30' Page 2 [3] Mr. Rendy M., learned counsel appearing for the applicant/petitioner submits that impleadment of the above name 3(three) officials are necessary as they are proper and necessary party for adjudicating the issue raise in the connected writ petition. Accordingly, the learned counsel prays for allowing the impleadment of the aforesaid officials as respondent nos. 5, 6 & 7 respectively in the connected WP(C) No. 952 of 2018. [4] Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA; Mr. Albert Keisham, learned counsel; and Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that they have no objection in allowing the present impleadment application. [5] In view of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records, this Court is of the considered view that impleadment of the above name 3(three) officers as respondent nos. 5, 6 & 7 are necessary as they are necessary and proper parties in the connected writ petition. [6] Accordingly, the impleadment application is allowed. [7] Registry is directed to incorporate the name of the 3(three) officials in the cause title of the connected writ petition Page 3 being WP(C) No. 952 of 2018 as respondent nos. 5, 6 & 7 respectively. [8] With the aforesaid direction, the present application is disposed of. JUDGE Lucy