Manipur High Court
H. Premjit Meetei vs Kumar Pandey & 4 Ors on 8 August, 2025
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item No. 98-101
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC(Cont.Cas(C) No. 48 of 2024 with
Cont.Cas(C) No. 26 of 2024 with
MC(Cont.Cas(C) No. 43 of 2024 with
MC(Cont.Cas(C) No. 56 of 2024
H. Premjit Meetei
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
Kumar Pandey & 4 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Order
08.08.2025
[1] Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, draws the attention of this Court to the direction in the order
dated 24.08.2025 in WP(C) No. 715 of 2015 passed by this Court where
termination order was set aside on technical ground with liberty to
conduct fresh enquiry as per rule and if enquiry is not initiated and
completed within the prescribed period, the service of the petitioner shall
be deemed to be reinstated with all consequential benefits. Para 6 of the
order dated 24.08.2025 is reproduced as:
"6. In view of submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the
material available on record, this Court is of the considered
view that the issue raised in the present writ petition is
squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 18-10-
2022 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 1061 of 2019 and
the present writ petition can be disposed of by granting
similar relief. Accordingly, the present writ petition is
disposed of with the following directions:-
(i) The impugned removal order dated 09-05-
2013, the impugned appellate order dated 28-
10-2013 and the impugned revision order
dated 23-04-2014 are hereby quashed and
set aside.
(ii) As the impugned orders have been quashed
and set aside only on technical ground of non
appointment of a presenting officer, the
respondents are at liberty to initiate a fresh
enquiry against the writ petitioner in respect
of the same charges if they wish to do so.
(iii) In the event of initiating such an enquiry, the
respondents should conduct the said
departmental enquiry fairly and in compliance
with the principles of natural justice and
conclude the same within a reasonable time
which should not be more than five months
from today.
(iv) In the event of holding a fresh departmental
enquiry against the petitioner, the petitioner
shall be treated as under suspension with all
the consequential benefits.
(v) It is also made clear that if no such enquiry is
initiated and completed within the period
prescribed above, the authorities are Page 4
of 5 WP(C) No. 715 of 2015 directed to
reinstate the petitioner in his service with all
the consequential benefits.
(vi) It is also made clear that the petitioner should
fully cooperate at the time of holding the fresh
departmental enquiry and if he does not
extend cooperation during the said enquiry,
the respondents are at liberty to approach
this Court for extension of the time period."
[2] It is submitted that the enquiry was completed beyond the
period of 5 (five) months as directed in (iii) of para 6 of the order and
subsequently, the petitioner has been terminated from service.
[3] On the next date, the respondent shall submit compliance
report in terms of the direction made in para 6 of the order.
[4] Mr. Boboy Potsangbam, learned CGC, prays for three
weeks' time for taking instruction.
[5] List this case on 25.09.2025.
[6] Furnish a copy of this order to Mr. Boboy Potsangbam,
learned CGC for taking instruction.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
KH. Digitally signed by
KH. JOSHUA
JOSHUA MARING
Date: 2025.08.11
MARING 14:10:54 +05'30'
