Manipur High Court
Bhabeswar Tongbram vs Khaidem Joychandra Singh And 2 Others on 19 February, 2025
SHAMURAILATPAM Digitally signed by
SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL SHARMA Page |1
SUSHIL SHARMA Date: 2025.02.20 11:07:51 +05'30'
Items No. 62, 66 & 67
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WA No. 14 of 2023
Bhabeswar Tongbram
...Appellant
- Versus -
Khaidem Joychandra Singh and 2 Others
...Respondents
With
WA No. 16 of 2023
With
WA No. 21 of 2023
B EF O R E
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. D. KRISHNAKUMAR
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GOLMEI GAIPHULSHILLU KABUI
ORDER
19-02-2025
(D. Krishnakumar,C.J.),
Mr. S.D. Singh, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Tondon
Thokchom, learned counsel, appears for the appellants; Mr. M. Devananda,
learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. N. Jyotsana, learned
counsel, appears for the State of Manipur; Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel,
appears for the UGC and Dr. RK Deepak, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.
T. Dennis, learned counsel, appears for the MTU. Heard also Mr. N. Jotendro,
learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel,
appears for the respondent No. 1 in WA No. 16 of 2023.
The preliminary objection has been raised by the counsel for the
appellant regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that
the prayer sought for in the writ petition is Certioriari. Since the appointment
of the appellant is Vice-Chancellor of the Manipur Technical University, the said
Writ of Certiorari is not maintainable.
Page |2
Learned counsel appearing for the parties has fairly agreed that
the prayer sought for by the petitioner in the writ petitions has not been decided
by the learned Single Judge.
To sum up, whether the prayer sought for in the writ petition of
Certiorari for quashing the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor is maintainable
while the Vice-Chancellor is holding the public office. The legal submission
raised by the appellant was not decided in the writ petition and after elaborate
arguments both the counsel for the parties have agreed that the order of the
writ court may be set aside and remit back to the learned Single Judge to decide
afresh, including the preliminary objection raised, in the writ appeal.
This Court is of the view that matters may be remitted back to
the learned Single Judge for deciding the writ petition afresh on its own merit
including the preliminary objections raised by the appellants, in accordance with
law.
Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the parties, we
have no hesitation to set aside the common judgment and orders dated
27.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 805 of 2021,
WP(C) No. 791 of 2021, WP(C) No. 825 of 2021 and WP(C) No. 807 of 2021
and the matters be remanded back to the learned Single Judge. Therefore, the
order of the writ court is liable to be set aside.
According to the appellant, tenure of the Vice-Chancellor of
Manipur Technical University is for the period of 5 years or till he attains the
age of 70 years whichever is earlier. He has assumed the charge as Vice-
Chancellor in the year 2022. In view of the said urgency, learned counsel for
the appellant seeks early disposal of the writ petition. The counsel for the
respondent also agrees that they will cooperate for disposal of the writ petition.
In fine, order of the writ court is set aside and consequently, writ
appeals stand allowed, and remit back to writ court to decide afresh. We
request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the writ petitions as early as
Page |3
possible within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this order.
It is also made clear that the parties also agreed that they shall
not seek any unnecessary adjournments before the writ court, for early disposal
of the matters.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sushil
