Disposed

M. Harekrishna v. M. Sule and 2 Others

Manipur HC13 Sept 2026MC(CONT.CAS(C))/175/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court noted that the petitioner had received his pension. The court observed that some association members might still be awaiting payment, but as no instructions were given on the delay, it discharged the contempt proceedings and closed the connected application.

What did the court decide?

None. The case was closed on the repayment of petitioner's dues and lack of instruction regarding others' non-payment.

M. Harekrishna Vs M. Sule and 2 Others — Contempt of Court | Manipur HC (2026)

¶1

KABORA Digitally signed MBAM by KABORAMBAM SAPANA SAPANA CHANU Date: 2026.09.14 CHANU 16:37:38 +05'30'

¶2

Item Nos. 10 & 11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL

¶3

Cont. Cas (C) No. 140 of 2022 With MC (Cont. Cas (C)) No. 175 of 2022

¶4

Shri M. Sule aged about 81 years, S/o. (Late) Mario, President of All Manipur Ching Tam Retd. Headmaster & Pandit Association, resident of Senapati Makhrelui, P.O. & P.S. Senapati, Senapati District, Manipur, Pin 795106.

¶5

Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Shri Μ. Harekrishna Singh, IAS, the Commissioner Education (S), Government of Manipur, Secretariat Building, Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur 795001.

¶8

Shri L. Nandakumar Singh, the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur, D.C. Office complex, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur.

¶9

Shri John K. Sellate, Principal Accountant General (A&E), Manipur, Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur-795001.

¶10

Shri Gyan Prakash, IAS Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Education (s), Government of Manipur, Babupara, PO & PS. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur-795001.

¶11

Shri Athikho Chalai, Principal Accountant General (A & E), Manipur.

¶12

Lamgin Singsit, Treasury Officer, Senapati Govt. Quarter, Senapati Mini Secretariat, SP. Office Complex, Senapati795106.

¶13

Rebek Lalparvul, Treasury Officer, Sadar Hills, DC Office Complex, Kangpokpi-795129.

¶14

Biju Keisham, Treasury Officer, Chandel, DC Office Block-D, P.O & P.S- Chandel-795127.

¶15

Lucy Haokip Luthang, Treasury Officer Churachandpur, Treasury Square, Central Lamka, Churachandpur-795128.

¶16

.......... Respondents

¶17

Cont. Cas (C) No. 140 of 2022 With MC (Cont.Cas (C)) No. 175 of 2022

¶18

Page 1

¶19

B E F O R E

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

¶21

For the Petitioner	:Mr. L. Raju, Advocate
For the respondents	:Mr. L. Rajesh, Advocate
	Mr. S. Suresh, Advocate
Date of Hearing	:14.09.2026.
Date of Order	:14.09.2026.

¶22

ORDER (ORAL)

¶23

[1] Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. L. Rajesh, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1, 4, 7, 8 & 9 through VC platform, Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondents No. 3 & 5 through VC platform and Md. Fakharuddin, learned counsel appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2.

¶24

[2] Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 3 & 5 submitted that the pensionary benefit due payable to the petitioner has already been released and the petitioner has received the same. Accordingly, the direction given by this Court has been complied with by the respondents and the contempt petition can be closed.

¶25

Cont. Cas (C) No. 140 of 2022 With MC (Cont.Cas (C)) No. 175 of 2022

¶26

Page 2

¶27

[3] Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that some of the members of the association is yet to receive their pensionary benefit. However, the learned counsel fairly submitted that as neither the petitioner nor any of the members has instructed him as to the reason for non-payment of the pensionary benefit and as the petitioner has already received his pensionary benefit, the present contempt case may be closed.

¶28

[4] Recording the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the contempt petition as well as the connected application are hereby closed.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Sapana

¶31

Cont. Cas (C) No. 140 of 2022 With MC (Cont.Cas (C)) No. 175 of 2022

¶32

Page 3

M. Harekrishna v. M. Sule and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Harekrishna v. M. Sule and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases