YAMKHOMANG HAOKIP Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the writ petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents not to disturb/evict the petitioner and his co -villagers whose identity and particulars are reflected/given in Annexure A/1 to the writ petition from the land/place as described in Annexure -A/2 to the writ petition, coupled with a prayer for quashing the impugned eviction notice/order bearing No. 1/2 ylws/97 -98, dated 14.5.1997 issued by the Assistant Conservator of Forests', YLWS - Moreh, the respondent No. 4 herein by contending inter alia, that the writ petitioner is a Secretary of the village authority of Mongjang Village, a Kuki village situate near Indo Myanmar Border having 36 hill -house Tax paying house -holders and he has been authorised to file the present writ petition and to represent the villagers of the said village and also to swear affidavit for and on their behalf by its village authority and that, in the year 1993, the Armed underground outfits N.S.C.N. attacked the Petitioner's village and burnt down their residential buildings and caused untold miseries and losses to the villagers and the innocent villagers were disarrayed and fear -stricken and, lastly, the villagers had to flee from their hearth and home and to take shelter at Ward No. 7. (Seven) at Moreh Town and, thereafter, on the application made by the Chief of Mongjang Village, the Sub -Divisional Officer (TPL), Moreh permitted the villagers of Mongjang village to resettle at place about 4 -6 Kms. away from Moreh Town on the National High Way No. 39, a government khas land vide, office memorandum bearing No. SDO (TPD/3 -14/90 dated 31.1.1995 and the said area/place was earlier recognised as a village vide office letter/order bearing No. 127/SO/Chief/76 -Vol. 1 dated 24.5.1983 as requested by the Chief of the village (Shri Doujapao Haokip) and the particulars of the said new site/village were given and reflected in the said memorandum dated 31.1.1995 which are as follows:

(2.) MR . K. Bipinchandra Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned eviction notice as in Annexure A/3 amounts to deprivation of life and is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, apart from it, the land possessed by the petitioner and his co -villagers is not part of reserved forest/wild -life sanctuary and the said notice does not contain any specific area from where the petitioner and his co -villagers are meant to be evicted as no boundaries of the land from where the proposed eviction process is to be initiated are given and, in fact, the said notice is vague. The learned counsel went on to contend that due ethnic clashes as mentioned above amongst the Nagas and Kukis, the poor villagers had to take shelter at safer zones for new settlement for preservation and protection of life and this phenomenon is now a reality which is sufficient for judicial recognition and, for this purpose, the normal law and the Rules have to be read and interpreted or even moulded in the light of this abnormal situation in view of the fact that the laws and the rules are meant to safeguard and to preserve and not to sabotage the societal interests. It is also submitted that the appropriate order and direction may be made from the end of this Court directing the respondents to allow the petitioner and his co -villagers to settle at the aforementioned place and not to evict them and also to protect them.

(3.) A bare perusal of the office memorandum bearing No. SDO(TPL)/3 -14/90 dated 31.1.1995 as in Annexure A/2 shows that the people of H. Mongjang village has been allowed to resettle in the said area as village which was earlier recognised as requested by the Chief of the Village in other words, by virtue of the said office memorandum, the petitioner and his co -villagers have settled at this place. The said office memorandum is important and relevant in the instant case and, accordingly, the same is quoted below :