Manipur High Court
State Of Manipur And 3 Others vs Smt. Lalzawni on 24 February, 2025
SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL Digitally signed by SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL P a g e | 1 SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.03.06 11:18:55 +05'30' Item No. 18 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL Review.Pet. No. 20 of 2025 State of Manipur and 3 Others ...Petitioners - Versus - Smt. Lalzawni ...Respondent B EF O R E HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. D. KRISHNAKUMAR ORDER
24.02.2025
Mr. S. Nepolean, learned senior GA assisted by Ms. RK Emily,
learned Deputy Government Advocate, appears for the petitioners.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that, in
view of the common judgment and order dated 21.10.2022 passed in
WP(C) No. 524 of 2018 (Shri T. Tungzalian Vs. State of Manipur & Ors.)
and Review Petitions No. 17, 33, 34, 35 of 2017 and review application
filed by the Department to review the order dated 21.10.2022, the said
review petition came to be dismissed and thereafter, the Government
convened a meeting on 25.01.2024 and the following decision was taken :-
“After threadbare discussion, the following decisions
were arrived at :
In view of the above facts and circumstances, there is
apparently no ground for filing a writ appeal against the Hon’ble
Court’s common Judgment & Order dated 21.10.2022 passed in
WP(C) No. 524 of 2018 (Shri T. Tungzalian Vs. State of Manipur
& Ors.) and Review Petitions No. 17, 33, 34, 35 of 2017 as the
Page |2same will amount to praying for restoration of earlier interim
orders of the Hon’ble High Court thereby restraining release of
50% of the retirement benefits and 1/3rd of the monthly pension
without leave of the Hon’ble High Court and those interim order
stands merged with the consent order dated 07-03-2017 passed
in the above writ petitions.
Most importantly, the Hon’ble Court vide the above order
dated 07-03-2017 has given the liberty to the State to initiate fresh
enquiry in terms of the Act and Rules, if so advised and fresh
enquiry has been initiated. Therefore, the State Government may
kindly proceed with the enquiry which has already been initiated
against the persons concerned for which notice have been issued
and Show Cause reply have already been submitted within a
stipulated period under the Manipur Personal Liability Act, 2006.
Therefore, the right of the State Govt. is not foreclosed as liberty
is already granted by the Hon’ble High Court.
The meeting ended with a vote of thanks.”
Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well
as the respondents have not controverted the aforesaid decision taken by
the Government.
In the light of the above decision taken by the Government,
following review applications came to be dismissed by this Court, there is no
merit in the review petition.
Consequently, the review petition is dismissed.
No order as to cost.
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sushil