KEISAM SHANTIPUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the writ applications raise the common question of law and facts and as such they are taken up for hearing together.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Ashok Potsangbam, learned Advocate for the petitioners in Civil Rule No. 734/96, W.P.(C) No. 374/99, W.P.(C) No. 629/1999, Mr. N. Kotishwar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 864/99, Mr. S. Jayanta, learned Advocate for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 236/1999 and Civil Rule No. 512/1996, Mr. N. Promodchandra, learned Advocate for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 720/99 and Mr. T. Nirmal Chand, learned Advocate for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 1109/99.1 have also heard Mr. Nimaichand, learned GA, Manipur for the official respondents in all the writ petitions, Mr. N. Promodchand, learned Advocate for the respondents No. 4 to 13 (in CR No. 734/96), W.P.(C) No. 374/99 for the private respondents, Mr. L. Sarat Singh, learned counsel for the private respondents in W.P.(C) No. 864/99 and Mr. L. Nandakumar, learned Advocate for the private respondents in Civil Rule No. 512/96.

(3.) In Civil Rule No. 734/96, 512/96 and W.P.(C) No. 374/99 the impugned order is same i.e. dated 19th February, 1996 issued by the Under Secretary to the Govt. of Manipur. That impugned order is quoted below: <FRM>as_537_GAULT2_2000.htm</FRM>