Manipur High Court
State Of Manipur; & Ors vs Pheiroijam Heramani; & Ors on 13 March, 2026
KABORAMBA Digitally
KABORAMBAM
signed by
M SANDEEP SANDEEP SINGH
Date: 2026.03.16
SINGH 11:07:28 +05'30'
Sl. Nos. 7-17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 2 of 2026
s
State of Manipur; & Ors.
Applicants
Vs.
Pheiroijam Heramani; & Ors.
Respondents
With
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 27 of 2025 with
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 28 of 2025 with
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 29 of 2025 with
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 3 of 2026 with
Review. Pet. No. 33 of 2025 with
Review. Pet. No. 34 of 2025 with
Review. Pet. No. 35 of 2025 with
Review. Pet. No. 37 of 2025 with
Review. Pet. No. 38 of 2025 with
Review. Pet. No. 39 of 2025
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
(ORDER)
(Order of the Court was made by Mr. M. Sundar, CJ)
13.03.2026
[1] Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier
proceedings made in the previous listings, more particularly the proceedings
made in the previous listing on 25.02.2026 which reads as follows:
‘25.02.2026
[1] Read this in conjunction with and in
continuation of earlier proceedings more particularly, the
proceedings dated 23.01.2026.
[2] In the hearing today, learned Attorney General for
India Shri R. Venkataramani was before this Court on the
Video Conferencing (VC) platform and he is instructed by
learned State Counsel Mr. O. Ratan Kumar who is before us in
the physical Court. Mr. HS Paonam, learned senior advocatePage 1 of 4
instructed by Mr. A. Arunkumar, Mr. S. Biswajit Meitei, learned
senior advocate instructed by Mr. W. Sanatomba and Ms.
Ayangleima, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 9 to 15 in
Review Petn. No.38 of 2025 and for respondent Nos. 11 to 17
in Review. Petn. No.33 of 2025 and Mr. Ch. Momon, learned
counsel for State Election Commission (State of Manipur) are
before this Court.
[3] After some arguments, it was submitted by all
counsel that the earlier pre-hearing conference held on
24.01.2026 in Imphal remains inconclusive and that it is
desirable to try and conclude the same.
[4] Learned Attorney General for India, all the afore-
referred learned senior counsel, counsel, agreed to have
another pre-hearing conference in the ensuing Yaoshang
holidays so as to come up with possible suggestions. Though
obvious, we make it clear that the court will ultimately take a
call qua any suggestion.
[5] In the interregnum, as regards State Election
Commission, (in the light of sub-paragraph (x) of paragraph 64
of the order sought to be reviewed) shall place before this Court
a timetable for conducting the elections to the local bodies
(Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads) in the next listing. It is
made clear that the timetable shall give firm dates for various
stages of the election process i.e., from Notification, polling
declaration of results, etc..
[6] All the learned senior counsel and counsel very
fairly submitted that they would coordinate with the office of
the learned Attorney General regarding logistics of the meeting
(pre-hearing conference) and this Court is informed by learned
Attorney General that Advocate General for State of Manipur
would also participate in the meeting as in the previous
meeting on 24.01.2026.
[7] Mr. Biswajit, learned senior counsel, on
instructions, submitted that he will place before this Court
Page 2 of 4
details of payments that have to be made to contractors for
work that has been done hitherto.
[8] Let the matter stand over to 13.03.2026.
[9] List on 13.03.2026.' [2] In the hearing today, Mr. R. Venkatarami, learned Attorney
General for India instructed by Mr. Kartikay Agrawal, learned counsel is before
this Court on the Video Conferencing (VC) platform, Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned
Advocate General instructed by Ms. Thanyomi Keishing, learned State
counsel, Mr. HS Paonam, learned senior counsel instructed by Mr. A.
Arukumar, learned counsel, Mr. S. Biswajit Meitei, learned senior counsel
instructed by Mr. W. Sanatomba and Ms. Ayangleima, learned counsel for
respondent Nos. 9 to 15 in Review Petn. No.38 of 2025 and for respondent
Nos. 11 to 17 in Review. Petn. No.33 of 2025 and Mr. Ch. Momon, learned
counsel for State Election Commission (State of Manipur) are before this
Court.
[3] Adverting to paragraph 4 of the earlier proceedings, learned
Attorney General for India and senior counsel/counsel before this Court,
submitted that a pre-hearing conference was held in New Delhi on 09.03.2026
(Monday). It was submitted that a further meeting here in Manipur with
learned Advocate General and other senior counsel/counsel, in continuation
of earlier meeting is necessary.
[4] After the meeting, if the afore-referred learned senior counsel
and counsel come up with suggestions/proposals, it is made clear that the
same will be considered by this Court, taking into account larger public
Page 3 of 4
interest i.e., it would be considered without restricting it or limiting it to the
lis alone.
[5] Adverting to paragraph 5 of our earlier proceedings, Mr. Ch.
Momon, learned counsel for State Election Commission (State of Manipur)
submitted that the office of State Election Commissioner is lying vacant. This
Court finds that State Election Commission has to be constituted by the
Government. This is vide Section 98 of ‘the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act, 1994
(26 of 1994)’ (hereinafter ‘said Act’ for the sake of brevity), ‘Government’ is
defined vide Section 2(g) of said Act and it is ‘State Government of Manipur’.
Learned Attorney General and Learned Advocate General fairly submitted that
they will play necessary advisory roles qua appointment of State Election
Commissioner.
[6] In the light of the narrative thus far, let this matter stand over
to 02.04.2026. To be noted, 02.04.2026 is a date agreed by senior counsel
and counsel before this Court and all counsel requested for listing on
02.04.2026.
[7] List on 02.04.2026.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
Page 4 of 4
