Manipur High Court
CONT CAS(C)/60/2025 of Sagolsem Dhanamani Singh Vs Prashant Kumar Singh and 2 others on 21 May 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL Cont.Cas(C) No. 60 of 2025
Item No. 31
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
Cont.Cas(C) No. 60 of 2025
Sagolsem Dhanamani Singh
…..Petitioner/s
-Versus-
Prashant Kumar Singh & 2 Ors.
….Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
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.
Order
22.05.2026
Present Mr. Kemlin Kshetrimayum, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. RK. Umakanta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. W. Niranjit, learned Dy. G.A. on behalf of respondent No. 1; Mr. L. Rajesh, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Tomclist, learned counsel on behalf of respondent No. 3.
The petitioner approached this Court with the present contempt petition for non-compliance of the direction dated 09.11.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 783 of 2023 whereby State Government was directed to consider and dispose of the representation dated 31.01.2022 submitted by the petitioner for considering his service linkup by passing a speaking order within a period of two months. By the representation, the petitioner prays for grant of notional benefit of his service as S.O.-I with effect from 08.03.2000 without benefit of pay and arrear.
Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel for respondent No. 3 (Chief Engineer, PWD, Government of Manipur), refers to the compliance order dated 10.01.2025 issued by the Secretary (Works), Government of Manipur whereby service of the petitioner would be counted from the first date of appointment, i.e., 08.03.2000 only for consideration of enrolment under old pension scheme. Learned senior counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that by issuing an order dated 10.01.2025 by the State Authority, the direction in the order dated 09.01.2023 has already been complied and the cause of the contempt petition does not survive.
However, Mr. Kemlin Kshetrimayum, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is yet to get seniority.
This Court is of the view that seniority is not an issue before this Court and the petitioner may approach appropriate forum in this regard.
With this observation, contempt petition is closed.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
KH. JOSHUA MARING Digitally signed by KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2026.05.25 10:16:49 +05'30'