Manipur High Court
Shri Huidrom Rajeshwar Singh Aged About ... vs The State Of Manipur Represented By The ... on 8 June, 2020
Bench: Ramalingam Sudhakar, Kh. Nobin Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
PIL No. 19 of 2020
Shri Huidrom Rajeshwar Singh aged about 54 years, S/o (L)
Huidrom Jugeswar Singh of Keisampat Leimajam Leikai P.O. &
P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795 001.
....Petitioner
- Versus -
1. The State of Manipur represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Manipur office at Secretariat, South Block,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur -
795 001.
2. The State Executive Committee of the State Disaster
Management Authority represented by the Chairperson, State
Executive Committee office at Secretariat South Block, P.O. &
P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795 001.
3. The Director General of Police, Manipur, PHQ, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795 001.
4. The Commissioner/ Secretary (Home) Government of Manipur
office at Secretariat, South Block, Babupara, P.O. & P.S.
Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795 001.
5. The Deputy Commissioner, Imphal East, P.O. & P.S.
Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur- 795 001.
6. The Deputy Commissioner, Imphal West, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel,
Imphal West District, Manipur.
7. The Superintendent of Police, Imphal East, P.O. & P.S.
Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur - 795 001.
8. The Superintendent of Police, Imphal West, P.O. & P.S.
Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795001.
...Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KH. NOBIN SINGH
For the petitioner : Mr. Juno Rahman, Advocate
For the respondents : Mr. Lenin Hijam, Additional A.G.
Date of Order : 08.06.2020
Page 1
ORDER
R.S. C.J.
08.06.2020 [1] Heard Mr. Juno Rahman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Additional Advocate General for the State respondents.
[2] On 02.06.2020, the following order was passed :-
"[1] Heard Mr. Juno Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Additional Advocate General for the State respondents.
[2] Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Additional Advocate General referred to order of the Government of Manipur, Home Department, No. 9/6(1)/2020-H(Pt) dated 1st June, 2020, whereunder the Chief Secretary issued an order modifying the earlier order in relation to the lockdown and curfew on the aftermath of COVID-19 pandemic. [3] The order speaks about the total lockdown and curfew in containment zones, and partial curfew in Imphal city and other District Headquarters from 2 p.m. to 5 a.m. on all days till 15.06.2020. In so far as other areas are concerned, the curfew is from 5 pm to 5 am till 30.06.2020.
[4] In the light of the above, the prayer of the PIL has to be revisited. The Government has also indicated that the High Court of Manipur can plan its activities in respect of judiciary as deemed fit, subject to lockdown orders and guidelines.
[5] In view of the above circumstances, the issue will be considered both in respect of the High Court and the District Courts. [6] Mr. Juno Rahman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for adjourning the matter so as to consider the scope of order dated 01.06.2020 issued by the Government of Manipur."
[3] Today, when the matter is listed, Mr. Juno Rahman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out certain difficulties faced by particular strata of persons/communities, namely, :-
(i) Shops dealing with raw materials for handlooms between 6 am to 2 pm. Page 2
(ii) Shops dealing with construction materials like cement and steel between 6 am to 2 pm.
(iii) All shops dealing with motor spare parts and lubricants from 6 am to 6 pm.
(iv) All mobile sale shops and mobile repairing shops between 6 am to 2 pm.
(v) continuation of works in construction projects, within limits of municipal corporation and municipalities, where workers are available on site and no workers are required to be brought in from outside (in site construction)
(vi) Private vehicles for emergency services including medical and veterinary care.
(vii) All exempted category of employees attending work place. [4] This is for the Government to take a decision in this regard, as to which sector will be allowed to work which is permissible within the provision of Disaster Management Act.
[5] The petitioner shall address these issues to the Government by way of separate representation because they are specific issues of a particular group of business community. As and when such a representation is made to the Government, the same shall be dealt with expeditiously. [6] In view of the order already passed, we disposed of the PIL as above.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
WAIKH Digitally
signed by
OM WAIKHOM
TONEN MEITEI
TONEN Date:
2020.06.08
16:01:42
MEITEI +05'30'
Page 3