Sl. No. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(WA) No. 13 of 2026 Union of India, represented by Secretary to Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi – 1; & 2 others. Applicants Vs. Joydeep Deb, M/371204, Hav/Store Keeper Technical (Medical), aged about 45 years, s/o Jatindra Ch. Deb now posted at present 24th Assam Rifles, Shangshak, C/o 99 APO, Pin No. 932024; & 27 Others. Respondents BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA For applicants Mr. BR Sharma, Central Government Counsel Date of Order 10.04.2026 ORDER (M. Sundar, CJ) [1] Captioned ‘Miscellaneous Case’ (‘MC’ for the sake of brevity) has been filed with a Condonation of Delay (CoD) prayer. [2] Mr. BR Sharma, learned ‘Central Government Counsel’ (‘CGC’ for the sake of brevity) for MC applicants is before us on the Video Conferencing (VC) platform. KABORAMBA M SANDEEP SINGH Digitally signed by KABORAMBAM SANDEEP SINGH Date: 2026.04.10 13:04:47 +05'30' [3] Delay sought to be condoned is delay in filing an intra- court appeal assailing ‘an order dated 12.03.2025 made by a Hon’ble Single Bench in W.P. (C) No. 797 of 2021’ (‘impugned order’ for the sake of brevity) [4] When the matter was taken up, it came to light that more than one error has crept in the captioned MC and some of the errors are as follows: (i) number of days of delay sought to be condoned has not been mentioned in the prayer, to be noted, only the period has been mentioned; (ii) the afore-referred period has also been wrongly mentioned; (iii) a tabulation of number of days of delay sought to be condoned set out in paragraph 4 is incorrect. [5] To be noted, the above are only illustrative and we make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the grounds on which condonation is sought. [6] Faced with the above situation, Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC made a very fair request. Learned CGC sought leave of this Court to withdraw the captioned MC but made a plea to preserve all the rights and contentions of MC applicants to come up with another MC (after removing the inadvertent errors) seeking condonation of delay qua intra-court appeal as regards the same impugned order. This request is acceded to. Page 3 of 3 [7] The afore-referred statement made at the Bar on the VC platform by Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC for MC applicants is recorded. To be noted, as learned CGC for MC applicants is on the VC platform, learned CGC has made endorsement in this regard in the ‘Chat Box’ and the same reads as follows: ‘Hon'ble Court may be pleased to kindly allow me to withdraw the Misc. Application No. 13 of 2026, for condonation of delay, with liberty to file afresh.’ [8] Registry is directed to be careful at the time of scrutiny in computations qua CoD applications. [9] In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned MC is disposed of as withdrawn/closed albeit with preservation of all rights and contentions of MC applicants in the manner set out supra. There shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Sandeep