KABOR v. The State of Manipur
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MV MURALIDARAN BEFORE Respondents
17.08.2022 Sanjay Kumar (C.J.): Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Advocate General, Manipur, appears for the State authorities. This writ petition was filed in public interest seeking a direction to the State authorities to ensure effective implementation of the Manipur Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2014, by exercising the powers vesting in them thereunder. A reply affidavit was filed by the State authorities on technicalities and also on merits in February, 2022. PIL No. 1 of 2021 Mr. M. Brojendro Meetei, learned counsel for the petitioner, sought time on 14.03.2022 to file a rejoinder thereto. However, there was no representation for Mr. M. Brojendro Meetei, learned counsel, thereafter. There was no representation for the petitioner or his counsel on 18.05.2022, 07.07.2022 and 10.08.2022. No rejoinder was filed to the reply of the State authorities. Mr. M. Rakesh, learned counsel, who had appeared for the petitioner in PIL No. 3 of 2021, which was filed on the same lines and who was permitted to get herself impleaded as a petitioner in this case, informed this Court on 10.08.2022 that she was no longer interested in doing so. As there was no representation for the petitioner in PIL No. 1 of 2021 or his learned counsel on 10.08.2022, the matter was directed to be listed on
17.08.2022 under the caption ‘Dismissal.’ Today, the matter appears under the caption ‘Dismissal’ but, yet again, there is no representation for the petitioner or for Mr. M. Brojendro Meetei, learned counsel. As the petitioner seems to have no interest in pursuing this writ petition filed in public interest and as the reply filed by the State authorities satisfactorily details the measures being taken to ensure effective implementation of the subject statute, PIL No. 1 of 2021 is dismissed for non-prosecution. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Sandeep JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE PIL No. 1 of 2021
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.