MC(El. Pet.) No. 8 of 2026 Page 1 Item Nos. 17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(El. Pet.) No. 8 of 2026 [Ref: El. Pet. No. 4 of 2022] Puyam Tomcha Meetei …Applicant/s Vrs. Sanglakpam Preshyojit Sharma …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 29.07.2026 This order is to be read in continuation and in conjunction with the earlier proceeding dated 21.07.2026, which reads as under:- “Mr. Thoungamba, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant. None appeared on behalf of respondent. The present application has been filed with a prayer for allowing determination of the present applicant and his colleague from being the conducting counsel of the respondent No. 2 in the connected El. Pet. No. 4 of 2022. Notice was issued upon the said respondent on 15.06.2026 ant the applicant have taken steps for service of notice upon the respondent. Thereafter, an additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant on 17.07.2026 and in the said affidavit, it has been stated that when one of the colleague of the applicant went to the home of the respondent to serve notice, his family members refused to receive the notice. In view of the said statement made by the deponent, it is deem that notice has been duly served upon the respondent as the family members of the respondent has refused to accept notice. With an intention to give another opportunity Lucy Gurum ayum Digitally signed by Lucy Gurumayum Date: 2026.07.29 17:25:24 +05'30' MC(El. Pet.) No. 8 of 2026 Page 2 to the respondent, Registry is directed to list this case again on 29-07-2026.” Mr. Thoungamba, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. The present application has been filed with a prayer for allowing determination of the present applicant and his colleague from being the conducting counsel of the respondent no. 2 in the connected El. Pet. No. 4 of 2022. When this matter is taken up today, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent. On consideration of the submission advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that the respondent herein, who is the respondent no. 2 in the connected election petition, is not extending any cooperation with regard to the pending election petition, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer made by the applicant for allowing his determination is justified. Accordingly, the present application is hereby allowed. The present application stands disposed of. JUDGE Lucy