AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 230 wordsAhanthem Bimol Singh, J
Heard Mr. Karung H. Kom, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3.
In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition and as agreed by both the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of at the Motion stage itself.
The only prayer made by the present petitioner is for issuing a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Chandel, Manipur to consider and dispose of the representation dated 14-01-2022 submitted by the petitioner within a stipulated period by issuing a speaking order.
Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned Government Advocate fairly submitted that as the Deputy Commissioner is the competent authority to consider and decide the grievances raised by the petitioner in the said representation, the respondent No. 1 will have no objection in disposing of the present writ petition as prayed for by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
In view of the submission made above, the Deputy Commissioner, Chandel, Manipur is directed to consider the representation dated 14-01-2022 submitted by the petitioner and to dispose of the same by issuing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.