MC(Cont.Cas(C)) No. 43 of 2026 Page 1 Item No. 70 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(Cont.Cas(C)) No. 43 of 2026 Ref.: Cont. Case(C) No. 5 of 2026 Rajkumar Dinesh Singh …Applicant/s Vrs. L. Radhakanta & 2 ors. …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 13-07-2026 Mr. K. Satyajeet, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant; Mr. L. Sanamacha, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent No. 1; Ms. N. Jyotsana, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2 and Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Rendy Maibam, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent No. 3. [2] The present application has been filed with a prayer for striking out the name of the present applicant from the array of parties in the connected Contempt Case(C) No. 5 of 2026. [3] It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that the order which has been alleged to be violated by the applicant was passed by this Court on 26-09-2025 in WP(C) No. 654 of 2025 wherein the Commissioner, University & Higher Education (Higher & Technical Education), Government of LAISHRA M DHAKESH ORI DEVI Digitally signed by LAISHRAM DHAKESHORI DEVI Date: 2026.07.14 16:52:54 +05'30' MC(Cont.Cas(C)) No. 43 of 2026 Page 2 Manipur and the Director of University & Higher Education, Government of Manipur, were directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the said order. [4] It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that the present applicant was no longer holding the post of the Administrative Secretary (Higher & Technical Education) on the date when the aforesaid order was passed and as such, there is no question of any willful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by this Court by the present applicant. The learned counsel, accordingly, submitted that the name of the applicant may be strike out from the array of parties in the said Contempt Case as he is not a necessary party. [5] Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3/writ petitioner fairly submitted that the present application can be allowed. [6] In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records, this Court is satisfied that the present applicant is not a necessary party as he did not commit any act of willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. Accordingly, the present application is hereby MC(Cont.Cas(C)) No. 43 of 2026 Page 3 allowed. Registry is directed to strike out the name of the applicant from the array of parties in the connected Contempt case. [7] With the aforesaid directions, the present application stands disposed of. JUDGE Dhakeshori