(1.) Four leading citizens of the State of Manipur have filed this Public Interest Litigation, entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for quashing the Notification No. 1/20/2009-CHA (i) dated 26.04.2010 issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Manipur setting in motion election of one member each from Autonomous District Councils. The said Notification was purportedly issued under sub-rule (2) of Rule 15 of the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Election of Members) Rules, 2009. The petitioners are also praying for quashing the follow up Notifications issued by Sub-Divisional Officer/Returning Officer and fixing the schedule of Election.
(2.) We have heard Ms. U. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri N. Kotiswar, learned Advocate General for the State of Manipur. The respondent No. 3 was represented by the Standing Counsel Mr. L. S. Singh, Sr. Advocate; whereas the Union of India (Respondent No.4) was represented by Sri R. Sarma, Assistant Solicitor General. We have also perused the affidavit filed on. behalf of the respondent No.3. As per order of this Court the Government also produced the relevant files and that was also perused by us.
(3.) The aforesaid Notifications have been assailed from two angles. Firstly it has been contended that the Chief Secretary of Manipur was away from Manipur since 23.04.2010 to attend an official training abroad and as such he could not have signed the Notification on 26.04.2010. It has also been stated in the Writ Petition and contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the aforesaid Notification was published in a local daily on 26.04.2010 and for publication of any document or news the newspaper have to get the document/information beforehand. To put it differently the learned counsel submitted that since the Notification of the Chief Secretary was published in a local newspaper: "Sangai Express" on 26.04.2010 it has to be inferred and presumed that the Notification was signed and circulated from the office of the Chief Secretary on 25.04.2010, which was a Government holiday being Sunday. It was submitted that ordinarily no Government business is transacted on a holiday and on this ground also the impugned Notification (Annexure-2) be declared as a fabricated document and subsequent Notification issued by Returning Officers as null and void.