Applicant vs The State Of Manipur Represented By The … on 22 May, 2026

Manipur High Court

Applicant vs The State Of Manipur Represented By The … on 22 May, 2026

Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh

SHAMURAILATPAM              Digitally signed by
                            SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL SHARMA
SUSHIL SHARMA               Date: 2026.05.25 11:11:05 +05'30'

                                                                        Item No. 11
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                    AT IMPHAL

                               MC(WA) No. 18 of 2026

              The All Moirang CD Block E-Rickshaw Development Co-
              operative Society Ltd., registered no. 28 of 2020 represented
              by its Secretary, K. Dillip Singh, S/O (L) K. Ibomcha Singh, aged
              about 48 years, a resident of Moirang Patlou P.O. & P.S.
              Moirang, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
                                                                  ... Applicant
                                      - Versus -

              1. The State of Manipur represented by the Principal
                  Secretary/Commissioner/Secretary (Transport), Govt. of
                  Manipur and its Office at Secretariat, Old Building,
                  Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District,
                  Manipur- 795001 and 5 Others.

                                                             ... Respondents
                              BEFORE
               HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

        For the applicant       :         Mr. Ajoy Pebam, Advocate
        Date of hearing & order :         22.05.2026

                                    O R D E R

[M. Sundar, CJ]

[1] Captioned ‘MC’ (‘Miscellaneous Case’) has been filed

SPONSORED

with a prayer seeking third party leave to assail an ‘order dated

14.10.2025 made by a Hon’ble Single Bench in WP(C) No. 813 of

2023 and MC thereat’ (‘impugned Single Bench order’ for the sake of

convenience). To be noted, in WP(C) No. 813 of 2023, ‘an order dated

Page 1|5
17.03.2023 made by Executive Officer, Moirang Municipal Council,

Moirang’ (‘impugned order’ for the sake of convenience) was assailed.

[2] This order has to be read in conjunction with and in

continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on

15.05.2026 which reads as follows :

‘15.05.2026

[1] Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel on record for
‘Miscellaneous Case’ (‘MC’ for the sake of convenience)
applicants and Ms. Ch. Sundari, learned State counsel are
before this Court (physical Court).

[2] After some arguments as the question of whether
MC applicants seeking third party leave is a person
aggrieved qua order dated 14.10.2025 arose.

[3] Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel on record for
MC applicants requested for a short accommodation to
get further instructions and revert to this Court.

[4] Afore- referred request for short accommodation
is acceded to.

            [5]    List one week hence.

            [6]    List on 22.05.2026.'


[3]         Before proceeding further, it is deemed appropriate to

write that MC applicant seeks to assail the Single Bench’s order by

way of intra-Court appeal by third party i.e., Writ Appeal (WA) vide

filing No. WA/940/2026, E-filing No. AMN20250000173C202600089,

CNR No. MNHC010010542026 (filed in this Court on 02.05.2026)

(‘said intended WA’ for the sake of convenience).

Page 2|5
[4] In the hearing today, Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel

on record for the MC applicant, adverting to earlier order dated

15.05.2026 set out the grievance of the MC applicant. It came to light

that the MC applicant is neither aggrieved by the impugned order nor

by the impugned Single Bench order. To put it differently, the

grievances of MC applicant are in a different realm and the MC

applicant may have to approach the Executive Officer, Moirang

Municipal Council, Moirang or any other appropriate authority.

[5] We also deem it appropriate to record that in this order

we are not expressing any view or opinion about the grievances of MC

applicant.

[6] Faced with the above situation, Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned

counsel on record for MC applicant sought leave of this Court to

withdraw the captioned MC as well as said intended WA but made a

plea to preserve all the rights and contentions of the MC applicant to

make a representation/approach the appropriate authorities

concerned more particularly, the Executive Officer, Moirang Municipal

Council, Moirang. Saying so, learned counsel on record made an

endorsement in the case file and scanned reproduction of the same is

as follows :

Page 3|5
Page 4|5
[7] In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned MC as well

as said intended WA filed vide filing No. WA/940/2026, E-filing No.

AMN20250000173C202600089, CNR No. MNHC010010542026 filed

in this Court on 02.05.2026 stand withdrawn/closed. Though obvious,

it is made clear that any authority more particularly, Executive Officer

of Moirang Municipal Council, Moirang, if approached, shall consider

the representation of the MC application untrammeled by instant

closure order. There shall be no order as to costs.

              JUDGE                        CHIEF JUSTICE
         FR/NFR
Sushil




                                                          Page 5|5