Manipur High Court
State Of Manipur; & Ors vs Pheiroijam Heramani; & Ors on 31 July, 2025
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
KABORAMBA Digitally
KABORAMBAM
signed by
M SANDEEP SANDEEP SINGH
Date: 2025.08.01
SINGH Sl. No. 56 - 61
13:33:29 +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
W.A. No. 9 of 2024
State of Manipur; & Ors.
Appellants
Vs.
Pheiroijam Heramani; & Ors.
Respondents
Clubbed with
MC (W.A.) No. 20 of 2024 with
MC (W.A.) No. 21 of 2024 with
MC (W.A.) No. 22 of 2024 with
W.A. No. 10 of 2024 with
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. KEMPAIAH SOMASHEKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
(ORDER)
(K. SOMASHEKAR, C.J.)
31.07.2025
Learned Attorney General of India, Mr. R. Venkataramani is
appearing through video conferencing, representing the appellants/State of
Manipur along with learned Advocate General, Manipur Mr. Lenin Hijam.
Learned senior counsel for respondent Nos. 1- 7, Mr. N.
Ibotombi and Mr. N. Jotendro are also present before the Court physically.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 8-10, Mr. M. Rustom
represents learned senior counsel Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar.
Learned senior counsel, Mr. S. Biswajit and learned counsel,
Ms. Ayangleima, who are intervenor, are also present before the Court
physically.
Page | 1
However, these matters are stated for arguments in further on
the part of the respondents. Accordingly, learned senior counsel, N. Ibotombi
and learned senior counsel N. Jotendro have addressed extensive arguments
on their part by referring to the provision of Section 17, 22(1)(b)(i) and also
Section 22(3). Wherein learned senior counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.
1-7 based upon the tenor of 22(1) Manipur Panchayati Raj Act of 1994 and
so also Section 17, relating to the Gram Panchayat consisting of Pradhan
and number of directly elected members as may be notified from time to
time by the State Government, and one member for every 350 population
or part thereof of the Panchayat area shall be elected as member of such
Panchayat.
Whereas, the learned senior counsel, N. Ibotombi and N.
Jotendro, submit that even though that people mandate the period of 5 years
but the provision of Section 22 indicates that there shall be two periods, that
is six months and another six months extension, the term of the members
even though appointing an administrating committee consisting of persons,
it may be continued till completion of election.
Apart from this submission, the aforesaid senior counsel, Mr.
N. Ibotombi and Mr. N. Jotendro have facilitated judgment reported in 2007
(3) GLT 899. However, learned Attorney General of India, representing the
appellants/State of Manipur emphatically submitting that the reliance which
has been facilitated by the aforesaid senior counsel, does not squarely
applicable to the issues in these appeal matters as in between the appellants
and the respondents and more so, that reliance which has been facilitated
Page | 2
by the learned senior counsel, it is only to the scope of dissolution qua failure
to hold election before the expiry of tenure and therefore this citation is not
squarely applicable to the present case on hand as where under these
appeals, challenging the orders rendered by the learned Single Judge on the
writ side.
This submission which is made by the learned Attorney General
of India representing the State of Manipur is taken on record.
Apart from the extensive arguments addressed by the learned
senior counsel for the respondents by referring to aforesaid provision of law
of Panchayati Raj Act, 1975 inclusive of Act of 1994, they are permitted to
submit synoptic notes in terms of arguments by furnishing copy of the same
to the learned Attorney General of India and learned Advocate General for
the appellants and so also the intervenor for the purpose of reference.
Learned senior counsel, Mr. S. Biswajit, seeks short
accommodation to apprise the issues in these matters as intervenor.
Keeping in view the above submission, Mr. S. Biswajit, learned
senior counsel is permitted to apprise the issues in between the appellants
and the respondents inclusive of the scope of Section 17, 22 in entirety of
the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
Accordingly, made an observation.
However, learned senior counsel, Mr. N. Ibotombi and Mr. N.
Jotendro, seeks some more time, that is about 10-15 minutes to address
further submission tomorrow.
Page | 3
In the meanwhile, learned Attorney General of India submits
that only the learned senior counsel, N. Ibotombi and N. Jotendro who have
extensively addressed the arguments, may continue to address 10-15
minutes tomorrow.
Hence, these matters would be listed tomorrow, i.e. on
01.08.2025. Priority shall be given for their arguments.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
Page | 4
