Manipur High Court
MC(WP(C))/367/2026 of S Aruna Devi Vs Union of India and 4 Others on 21 May 2026
Item nos. 3 & 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 344 of
Item nos. 3 & 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 344 of 2026 with
MC(WP(C)) No. 367 of 2026
S. Aruna Devi
… Petitioner
- Versus -
Union of India and 4 Ors.
… Respondents
B E F O R E
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. K. Roshan, learned counsel along with Mr. Jonty Roscoe, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC for the respondents along with Mr. Jothimalar, Deputy Commandant, CRPF.
When the matter was taken up on 15.05.2026, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for 1(one) week time for taking instructions as to whether the petitioner is applying for Voluntary Retirement from Service (VRS) and the order dated 15.05.2026 is reproduced below: “15.05.2026
Present Mr. K. Roshan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC along with Mr. Jothimalar, Deputy Commandant, CRPF.
The petitioner is a Constable-GD (Female) in CRPF and she is aggrieved by transfer order 14.01.2026 from GC- Imphal to 233(M) BN, UP. It is submitted that her medical category is P3(P) and she is unfit for active service. The Oinam Thoib a Meitei Digitally signed by Oinam Thoiba Meitei Date: 2026.05.22 17:47:41 +05'30'
petitioner has already submitted a representation dated 20.09.2025 for 1(one) year retention with expression of taking Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) after 1(one) year on medical ground. It is stated that in the impugned transfer order dated 14.01.2026, the representation dated 20.09.2025 was not considered. In the circumstance, 1(one) week time is granted to the petitioner to verify whether she is applying for VRS to the authority or not.
List these cases on 22.05.2026.
Till the next date, no adverse action be taken against the petitioner without the leave of this Court.”
When the matter is taken up today, Mr. K. Roshan, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions submits that the petitioner expresses her desire to submit application for VRS to the authority and she may be permitted 2(two) week’s time for applying the same and till then, the petitioner may be retained with the present posting at GC-Imphal.
Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC submits that if the VRS application is not submitted within 2(two) week’s from today i.e. 22.05.2026, the petitioner will not be retained at GC- Imphal and has to proceed with the new posting.
Recording the submissions made at the bar, on instructions from the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner is permitted 2(two) week’s time to file an appropriate application for VRS to the authority,
(ii) the date of the application will be treated as the date from which the petitioner wants to retire under VRS,
(iii) the respondents shall consider the application of the petitioner as per applicable rule and pass an appropriate order,
(iv) till appropriate order is passed by the respondent, the petitioner will be retained at the present posting at GC-Imphal and
(v) on failure of the submission of the application for VRS within 2(two) week’s, the petitioner has to proceed to the new posting.
With these observations, WP(C) No. 344 of 2026 is disposed of.
MC(WP(C)) No. 367 of 2026 is also disposed of, accordingly.
JUDGE
Thoiba