Item No. 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 636 of 2026 Thiyam Shakhen Singh …..Petitioner/s -Versus- State of Manipur & 3 Ors. ….Respondent/s BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 27.08.2026 [1] Heard Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Malemleima, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner. [2] The petitioner who is Rifleman in the Indian Reserve Battalion, Manipur was removed from service by an order dated 01.04.2017 for indiscipline and dereliction of duty without any authority. It is submitted that while in duty the petitioner was injured and have 60 pellets in his body; and due to that, he suffered mental trauma. In the circumstances, he could not attend duty and appeared before the Enquiry Officer in the departmental proceeding. It is submitted that recently he has been declared as fit for resumption in duty by the Doctor of Regional Institute of Medical Sciences on 01.07.2026 and thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation to the DIG, AP-I for review of the order dated 01.04.2017 passed by the Commandant, 7th IRB for removal him from service. [3] The substantive prayer in the writ petition is for setting aside the removal order dated 01.04.2017 and also for a direction to the respondents, especially DIG who is respondent No. 3 to consider the representation dated 03.07.2026 submitted by the petitioner for reviewing the removal order dated 01.04.2017. [4] During the course of hearing, Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel, submits that writ petition may be disposed of at this stage by directing the respondents, especially respondent No. 3 to consider the representation dated 03.07.2026 submitted by the petitioner and dispose of by a speaking order within a stipulated time. [5] Mr. S. Niranjan, learned G.A. for the State respondent, submits that he may be given some time to take instruction in this regard. [6] This Court has perused the materials on record. The representation dated 03.07.2026 is, in another word, an appeal against the removal order dated 01.04.2017. Since the representation in the form of appeal is pending before the appellate authority, this Court is of the view that the writ petition may be disposed of at this stage by directing respondent No. 3 (DIG, AP-I) to consider the representation dated 03.07.2026 on its own merit. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No. 3 to consider the representation dated 03.07.2026 submitted by the petitioner for reviewing the removal order dated 01.04.2017 and pass a speaking order, as per applicable rule within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. [7] It is made clear that this Court does not express any opinion on the merit of the representation submitted by the petitioner. [8] With this observation, writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Kh. Joshua Maring KH. JOSHUA MARING Digitally signed by KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2026.08.28 14:10:32 +05'30'