Manipur High Court
MC(Review.Pet.)/14/2026 of Union of India and 2 others Vs Hem Sagar Uprety and another on 23 August 2026
Suppl. Sl. No.3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
2026:MNHC:183-DB
Suppl. Sl. No.3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
MC (Review. Pet.) No. 14 of 2026
Union of India; & 2 Ors. …Applicants -Vs-
Hem Sagar Uprety & Anr. …Respondents
BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH (ORDER)
(Order of the Court was made by M. Sundar, CJ)
24.08.2026.
Captioned ‘miscellaneous case’ (‘MC’ for the sake of brevity) has been filed with a ‘Condonation of Delay’ (‘CoD’ for the sake of brevity) prayer qua 81 days delay in filing a review petition, seeking review of ‘a common order and judgment dated 28.04.2026’ (‘said judgment/order’ for the sake of convenience) made in writ appeal No. 25 of 2025 etc.,
Mr. Jeson, learned counsel for MC applicants, adverting to paragraph Nos. 8 & 9 of MC application submitted that the wait for response of competent authority as regards clarification sought, caused the delay and therefore, the delay sought to be condoned is neither willful nor wanton.
Issue notice.
Mr. Abdul Baqee Khan, learned counsel who is present in Court accepts notice for R1 (first respondent) i.e., private respondent and +05'30'
2026:MNHC:183-DB
Mr. W. Niranjit, learned State counsel who is also present in Court accepts notice for R2 (second respondent) i.e., official respondent.
Afore-referred 2 (two) counsel for the 2 (two) respondents submitted that they have no objection to the captioned MC being allowed. In other words, both learned counsel for 2 (two) respondents submitted that they are not opposing the captioned MC application. Therefore, this Court refrains itself from delving more into the reasons for delay.
In the light of the narrative thus far, delay sought to be condoned, stands condoned.
Registry is directed to take up the review petition vide CNR: MNHC010021502026, Efiling No: AMN20230000085C202600028, Filing No. : MC (Review.Pet.)/1885/2026, Date of Filing: 17-08-2026, process the same, assign number if otherwise in order and list it before this Court tomorrow. If there are objections, subject to objections being cleared, the review shall be numbered and listed at the earliest as Mr. Jeson, learned counsel for MC applicants undertakes to clear objections if any, latest by Thursday i.e., 27.08.2026. If it is a case of no objections or objections being cleared today, review petition to be listed before this Court tomorrow.
In the light of the narration thus far, captioned MC is allowed/ordered as prayed vide instant constant order. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sapana
P.S. I : Upload forthwith. P.S. II : All concerned will stand bound by web copy uploaded in High Court website inter-alia as the same is QR coded.