Manipur High Court
Pukhrambam Jyoti Devi vs Manipur Public Service Commission & Ors on 4 March, 2025
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
IN. 52
Digitally signed by
SHOUGRAKPAM SHOUGRAKPAM
DEVANANDA DEVANANDA SINGH
Date: 2025.03.04 15:49:27
SINGH +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 664 of 2022
Pukhrambam Jyoti Devi ... Petitioner
Vs.
Manipur Public Service Commission & ors. ... Respondents
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
O R D E R
04-03-2025
Ms. P. Jyoti, the petitioner appearing in person submitted that
she was earlier represented by Mr. Ajoy Pebam as her counsel, however,
she has obtained a No Objection Certificate from her counsel and that she
desires to appear in person. The petitioner, accordingly, seek leave to let
her appear in person to conduct this case.
Leave is granted.
As prayed for by the petitioner, list this case again on
01-04-2025 so as to enable her to file a recast petition in terms of
the order passed today in MC(WP(C)) No. 111 of 2024 and a copy of the
same be furnished to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
JUDGE
Devananda
MC(WP(C)) No. 111 of 2024 Contd.../-
IN. 53
SHOUGRAKPAM Digitally signed by
SHOUGRAKPAM
DEVANANDA DEVANANDA SINGH
Date: 2025.03.04 15:49:44
SINGH +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC(WP(C)) No. 111 of 2024
(Ref:- WP(C) No. 664 of 2022)
Pukhrambam Jyoti Devi ... Applicant
Vs.
State of Manipur & ors. ... Respondents
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
O R D E R
04-03-2025
Heard Ms. P. Jyoti, the applicant appearing in person;
Mrs. O. Momota, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Suman, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. M. Rarry, learned
senior counsel assisted by Ms. Nikita, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents No. 2 to 6.
The present application has been filed with the prayer for
allowing the petitioner to amend the pleadings made in her writ petition
being WP(C) No. 664 of 2024 as proposed at para 5 of the present
application.
Mrs. O. Momota, learned senior counsel appearing for the
respondent No. 1 raised strong objection on the ground that the
proposed pleadings are not matter of facts and it pertains to law
points only and if such amendment are allowed, it will change the nature
and issues of the original writ petition. Mr. M. Rarry, learned senior
counsel, however, fairly submitted that he has no strong objection with
regard to the prayer for amendment, however, he endorsed the
submission made by Mrs. O. Momota, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No. 1.
MC(WP(C)) No. 111 of 2024 Contd…/-
-2-
I have perused and carefully examined the proposed
amendment made in para 5 of the present application. On careful
examination of the pleadings which the petitioner wants to incorporate in
her writ petition, this court finds that all the averments made by the
petitioner as proposed amendments pertains to facts which arose or
which comes to the knowledge of the petitioner after filing of the writ
petition and the amendment sought for in the prayer portion relates to
challenging the appointment order subsequent upon the DPC impugned
in the original writ petition. Since the subsequent appointment order can
be challenged by the present petitioner by filing another writ petition, this
court is of the considered view that in order to avoid multiplicity of
litigation, it will be in the interest of justice to allow the present
application, since the proposed amendment pertains to the same subject
matter and that the nature and the issue raised in the present writ petition
will not be changed.
In view of the above, the present amendment application is
allowed. Petitioner is directed to file a recast of the writ petition by
incorporating the proposed amendment within a period of one week
from today.
With the aforesaid direction, the present application stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
Devananda
MC(WP(C)) No. 111 of 2024 Contd.../-
[ad_1]
Source link