[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Manipur High Court
N. Khelemba Meitei vs Rk Lalsana Singh & Ors on 13 February, 2026
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
SHOUGRAKPAM Digitally signed by
SHOUGRAKPAM
IN. 90 to 92
DEVANANDA DEVANANDA SINGH
Date: 2026.02.13 16:34:50
SINGH +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026
N. Khelemba Meitei ... Applicant
Vs.
RK Lalsana Singh & ors. ... Respondents
With
MC(WP(C)) No. 917 of 2025 &
WP(C) No. 1000 of 2025
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
O R D E R
13-02-2026
[1] Heard Mr. M. Rarry, learned senior counsel assisted by
Ms. M. Nikita, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and
Mr. Y. Nirmolchand, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. L. Raju,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
[2] The present application being MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026
has been filed with the prayer for vacating/ modifying the interim stay
order dated 16-12-2025 passed by this court in WP(C) No. 1000 of 2025.
[3] Mr. M. Rarry, learned senior counsel appearing for the
applicant submitted that the said interim order has been passed without
giving any notice to the present applicant and the same has been passed
ex-parte as against the present applicant. The learned senior counsel
advanced his argument for vacation/ modification of the interim order
mainly on the ground that the petitioner has more experience and
MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026 & ors. Contd.../-
expertise for work under EPC (Engineering Procurement Construction)
Mode and Central Funding Projects and is familiar and well versed with
supervising of road projects and have better experience in handling
big road projects under EPC contract. The sum and substance of the
argument advanced by the learned senior counsel is that the applicant
has more expertise and experience than the writ petitioners for executing
the work as Senior Project Manager/ EAP.
[4] It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that as
the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit to the averments
made by the applicant in the present application, the averments made
by the applicant in this writ petition can be taken as true having been not
controverted by the writ petitioners. The learned senior counsel further
submitted that the applicant has already joined his posting pursuant to
the order dated 01-12-2025 and if the interim order passed by this court
is not vacated or modified, he will have no place to discharge his duties.
The learned senior counsel, accordingly, prays for modifying/ vacating
the interim order passed by this court.
[5] Mr. Y. Nirmolchand, learned senior counsel appearing for
the wit petitioners/ respondents No. 1 and 2 in the present application
submitted that as no notice has yet been issued in the present
application, the petitioners cannot file any counter affidavit to the
present application seeking for vacation or modification of the interim
order. The learned senior counsel submitted that if two or three days'
time is granted to the respondents No. 1 and 2, they will file their counter
affidavit and the present application can be considered in the next week.
MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026 & ors. Contd.../-
[6] The learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners/
respondents No. 1 and 2 further submitted that so far as in-charge
arrangement is concerned under the State Government, the Office
Memorandum dated 03-10-2020 issued by the Department of Personnel
& Administrative Reforms (DP), Government of Manipur will hold the
field and as the applicant has not assailed the said O.M., he cannot say
that the in-charge arrangement should be made solely for experience
and expertise. It has also been submitted by the learned senior counsel
that before issuing the impugned order dated 02-12-2025, no screening
of the writ petitioners and the present applicant has ever been conducted
and as such, the averments made by the applicant in his application
that he has more expertise and experience than the writ petitioners
cannot be accepted.
[7] Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA appearing for the State
respondents submitted that he may be given a few days' time to receive
instruction from the authorities as to whether any screening process
to assess the experience and suitability of the candidates had been
undertaken by the authorities before issuing the impugned order.
[8] Considering the submission made by the counsel appearing
for the parties, registry is directed to list these cases again on
19-02-2026 for consideration of the application seeking for vacation/
modification of the interim order.
[9] Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA is requested to obtain
instruction from the authorities as indicated hereinabove and place the
same before this court on the next date of hearing.
MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026 & ors. Contd.../-
[10] At this juncture, Mr. M. Rarry, learned senior counsel
appearing for the applicant submitted that the application seeking for
vacation/ modification of the interim order may be disposed of today.
[11] In view of the narrative made hereinabove, this court is of the
considered view that the present application cannot be disposed of at
this stage. It is made clear that the writ petitioners should file counter
affidavit to the present application on or before 17-02-2026 with advance
copy to the learned counsel appearing for the other parties.
Earlier interim order shall continue till the next date.
JUDGE
Devananda
MC(WP(C)) No. 92 of 2026 & ors. Contd.../-
