Dismissed

Keisham Dilipkumar Singh v. Manipur Public School Society ans Anr.

Manipur HC13 Sept 2026MC(WP(C))/444/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions and a connected amendment application were closed as infructuous since the respondents had already released the retirement benefits claimed. The court left open the claim for delayed/interest payments, directing petitioners to file a fresh petition.

What did the court decide?

Adjourned the present petitions as infructuous upon payment of benefits; directed parties to file a fresh petition for interest claims.

Keisham Dilipkumar Singh Vs Manipur Public… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Manipur HC (2026)

¶1

Digitally signed by SHOUGRAKPAM DEVANANDA SINGH Date: 2026.09.14 16:30:39 +05'30'

¶2

SHOUGRAKPAM DEVANANDA SINGH

¶3

IN. 55 to 57

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL

¶5

MC(WP(C)) No. 444 of 2026 Keisham Dilipkumar Singh … Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Manipur Public School Society & anr. … Respondents

¶8

With

¶9

WP(C) No. 113 of 2024 & WP(C) No. 99 of 2024

¶10

B E F O R E

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

14-09-2026

¶14

[1] Mr. I. Denning, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioners and Mrs. I. Bimola, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the respondents.

¶15

[2] Both these writ petitions seek the same relief and the main relief claimed for is for issuing a direction to the respondents to release the retirement benefits, gratuity and leave encashment due payable to the petitioners within a stipulated period.

¶16

[3] During the pendency of these writ petitions, all the entitled benefits after retirement have been given to the petitioners and this factum has been bought on record by the petitioners themselves by filing additional affidavit.

¶17

[4] The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that as the relief sought for in these two writ petitions has

¶18

Contd.../-

¶19

MC(WP(C)) No. 444 of 2026 & ors.

¶20

-2-

¶21

been granted by the respondents, nothing remains for adjudication and the present writ petitions can be closed as infructuous.

¶22

[5] In response to the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently submitted that as the retiral benefits due payable to the petitioners have been released by the respondents very belatedly in a discriminatory manner, the petitioner in WP(C) No. 99 of 2024 had filed an application registered as MC(WP(C)) No. 444 of 2026 seeking for amendment of the writ petition with regard to the prayer made in the writ petition, i.e., for issuing a direction to the respondents for payment of interest of the amount of the retirement benefits due payable to the petitioners. The learned counsel further submitted that because of the discriminatory action of the respondents, the petitioners are entitled to claim for interest.

¶23

[6] After hearing the submission advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and on perusal of the record, this court is satisfied that the relief sought for by the petitioners in the writ petitions filed by them has been granted by the respondents and as such, no cause survives for adjudication in these two writ petitions. However, with regard to the connected application seeking for amendment of the prayer made in the writ petitions, this court is of the considered view that the petitioners can claim for payment of interest by filing a separate writ petition and as such, this court is not inclined to allow the present application seeking for amendment. Accordingly, both the two writ petitions as well as the connection application are hereby closed as infructuous. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners have

¶24

Contd.../-

¶25

MC(WP(C)) No. 444 of 2026 & ors.

¶26

-3-

¶27

liberty to approach this court again by filing a fresh writ petition claiming for payment of interest.

¶28

With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions as well as the connected application are hereby closed as infructuous.

JUDGE

Devananda

Contd.../-

MC(WP(C)) No. 444 of 2026 & ors.

Keisham Dilipkumar Singh v. Manipur Public School Society ans Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keisham Dilipkumar Singh v. Manipur Public School Society ans Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases