High Court Bar Association, Manipur vs. Union Of India

TTEM NO. $57$

COURT NO.2

SECTION XIV

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No.19206/2023

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-03-2023 in WP(C) No. 229/2023 passed by the High Court of Manipur at Imphal)

DINGANGLUNG GANGMEI

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

MUTUM CHURAMANI MEETEI & ORS.

Respondent(s)

([ONLY CP (C) D No. 21371/2024 IS LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM])

WITH

Diary No.21371/2024 (XIV) (FOR INTERLOCUTARY APPLICATION ON IA 115463/2024 & FOR APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION ON IA 118116/2024)

Date: 24-05-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

$CORAM :$

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL (VACATION BENCH)

For Petitioner(s)

Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR Mr. Lalgoulen Kipgen, Adv.

Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR For Respondent(s)

Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv. Mr. Pratyush Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kartikay Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Ameya Vikrama Thanvi, Adv.

Mr. Kumar Mihir, AOR

Ms. Aishwarya Bhatti, Asq, Adv.

Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

Mr. Lenin Singh Hijam, Adv. Gen., Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Mayank Sapra, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chava, Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv. Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv. Mr. Kanu Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Pratyush Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Shingal, Adv. Mr. Kartikey Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ameyvikram Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav Dy. Govt., Adv. Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR Mr. Siddhesh Shirish Kotwal, AOR Mr. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Pratyush Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv. Mr. Kartikay Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Ameyavikrama Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Adv. Ms. Baani Khanna, AOR Mr. Robin Singh, Adv. Mr. Vasu Kalra, Adv. Mr. Ranjeet Singh , AOR Mr. Kailash Pandey, Adv. Mr. Krishna Yadav, Adv. Mr. Bibhu Dutta Das, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Contempt Petition(Civil) Diary No. 21371/2024:-

1. Application seeking permission to file the Contempt Petition is granted.

2

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners taking the Court to the order dated 25-9-2023 has submitted that the respondents have failed to take any action against the encroachers who have encroached upon the properties of Kuki-Zo community and thereby have committed contempt of the said order. The relevant part of the said order reads as under:-

"The State of Manipur and the Union of India are given a period of one week to respond to the following directions sought in the 9th Report, namely:

(i) The State Government should immediately identify all religious buildings in the State (which would include Churches; Hindu Temples; Sanamahi Temples; Mosques and any building of any other religion, whether existing at present or vandalized/damaged/burnt in the violence which started on 03.05.2023.

(ii) The situs of these religious buildings be protected from encroachment and the buildings be protected from damage/destruction.

(iii) The Government of Manipur should ensure the protection of the properties of the displaced persons as well as the properties which have been destroyed/burnt in the violence and prevent their encroachment. In case any property has been encroached, the encroachers be directed to forthwith remove their encroachment, failing which the person concerned would be liable for contempt of court for non-compliance of the orders of the Supreme Court of India."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to point out as to who has made the encroachments and on whose specific properties the encroachments have been made. No such alleged encroachers have been made party to the present proceedings.

4. Learned Additional Solicitor General – Ms. Aisharya Bhati appearing for the respondent – State of Manipur states that the State as well as the Union Government are taking all steps to

3

protect the properties of the displaced persons, as directed by this Court in the said order as well as the order dated 10-10-2023 passed by the Hon'ble Governor, State of Manipur. The said statement is taken on record.

5. In view of the above, we are not satisfied that any contempt of court has been committed by the respondents in connection with the order dated 24-9-2023, as alleged by the petitioners.

6. Hence, the present contempt proceedings are dismissed.

7. It is needless to say that the petitioners shall be at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy as may be available to them under the law for any action or inaction on the part of the respondents, as the existency may require.

8. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

(VISHAL ANAND) (AVGV RAMU) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)