Research › Search › Judgment

Manipur High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 152 (MAN)

Seikhothang Haokip v. State of Manipur

2022-08-10

AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. Anjan Prasad Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner No. 1 is claiming to be the Chief of Mongbung Village and the petitioner No. 2 is claiming to be the Chief of the Moljal/ Muljol Village. According to them, their villages are situated in the hill areas of Manipur and they have been paying Hill House Tax to the Office of the Sub-Deputy Collector, Jiribam. They have filed the present writ petition challenging the order dated 29-05-2008 issued by the Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of Manipur, allotting 44.5170 Hectares of land in favour of the Manipur Police Department for construction of Rehabilitation Centre at Jiribam and praying for quashing the same. 3. Mr. Anjan Prasad Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners raised only one ground in assailing the said allotment order. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the land allotted under the impugned allotment order falls within the two villages of the petitioners which are situated in the hill areas of Manipur. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel that the provisions of the MLR & LR Act, 1960 are not extended in the hill areas of Manipur as provided under Section 1(2) of the said Act and as such, the impugned allotment order issued by the Government in exercise of the power conferred under Section 14(2)(a) of the MLR & LR Act is illegal and void ab initio. The learned counsel vehemently submitted that on this ground alone, the impugned allotment order is liable to be quash and set aside. 4. The provisions of Section 1(2) of the MLR & LR Act, 1960 are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:- '1. Short title, extent and commencement. - (1) This Act may be called the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Manipur except the hill areas thereof: Provided that the State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, extend the whole or any part of any section of this Act to any of the hill areas of Manipur also as may be specified in such notification.' 5. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Manipur except the hill areas thereof: Provided that the State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, extend the whole or any part of any section of this Act to any of the hill areas of Manipur also as may be specified in such notification.' 5. It is to be noted that even though Sub-Section (2) of Section 1 of the MLR & LR Act, 1960 provides that the provisions of the said Act are not extended in the hill areas, the proviso thereto provides that the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, extend the whole or any part of any section of the said Act to any of the hill areas of Manipur. In this regard, the learned Government Advocate placed before this court an order dated 22-02-1962 passed by the Chief Commissioner, Manipur, which was notified in the Manipur Gazette (Extraordinary, dated 26-02-1962) extending the provisions of Chapter-I to VIII, XII, XIII and Sections 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 125, 126, 132 and 133 of Chapter-X of the MLR & LR Act, 1960 in the whole of the areas comprised in the villages mentioned in the said order and situated in the Jiribam Sub-Division and also such areas which lie contiguous to and in between two and more of the said villages w.e.f. 01-03-1962. In the said order, the name of two villages of the petitioners i.e., Muljol and Mongbung appears at Sl. No. 82 and 83 respectively. In view of the above, there is no doubt that the provisions of Section 14 of the MLR & LR Act, which is under Chapter-III of the said Act, are extended to the said two villages of the petitioners. Accordingly, this court is of the considered view that the ground raised by the counsel for the petitioners in assailing the impugned allotment order is without any merit and substance and this court is of the considered view that the State Government has the power and authority to issue the impugned allotment order and no illegality has been committed in issuing the said allotment order. In the result, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed as being devoid of merit. Earlier interim order passed in the present writ petition stands vacated. Parties are to bear their own costs.