Ukhrul | September 30 : Guwahati High Court directed Manipur Government to show cause why Ukhrul Autonomous District Council is not functioning at the District Headquarter. Double Bench comprising Justice A.K Goel and Mrs. Justice Anima Hazarika in a ruling on 27 September at Division Bench No.2 of Guwahati High Court directed the Chief Secretary of Manipur, who is Respondent No.1 in a PIL No 56 of 2011 category 10194, Vareiyo Shatsang vs. State of Manipur and others, to file an affidavit responding the Petitioner within 12 December 2011 as to why Ukhrul Autonomous District Council should not function from the District Headquarter, Ukhrul.
In the PIL, Manipur Government was represented by its Advocate General K. Singh whereas Senior Counsel B.C Das represented the petitioner. The Petitioner prays for direction to the State government not to interfere with the administration of Autonomous District Council (ADC) Ukhrul as well as to direct the ADC to function at the district Headquarter Ukhrul.
The petition further state that District Council under Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act, 1971 was basically framed for administration of hill areas in Manipur, as such its present functioning from Khuman Lampak in Imphal is clearly outside the purview of the law and also defeat the very purpose of the Act.
In the first hearing at Division No.2 of Guwahati High Court, the Advocate General argued that ADC Ukhrul cannot function from the District Headquarter due to threats from NSCN. However, Hon’ble
Justice A.K Goel and Mrs. Justice Anima Hazarika rejected the argument as it was based on political arguments and ask for legal justification.
Justice Goel while giving remarks to the Advocate General’s argument of alleged NSCN threat on the life of the Councilors as a reason for functioning at khuman lampak which is in Imphal East cites example of the rationality of MLAs shifting to Delhi for threat perception. The Justice further made it a point to emphasis on India’s polity of grassroots democracy. The Justice of the Double Bench while appreciating the prima facie case of the PIL transfers the case to from Guwahati to Imphal for reason of proximity and fixed the next hearing on 12 December.
In the PIL, Manipur Government was represented by its Advocate General K. Singh whereas Senior Counsel B.C Das represented the petitioner. The Petitioner prays for direction to the State government not to interfere with the administration of Autonomous District Council (ADC) Ukhrul as well as to direct the ADC to function at the district Headquarter Ukhrul.
The petition further state that District Council under Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act, 1971 was basically framed for administration of hill areas in Manipur, as such its present functioning from Khuman Lampak in Imphal is clearly outside the purview of the law and also defeat the very purpose of the Act.
In the first hearing at Division No.2 of Guwahati High Court, the Advocate General argued that ADC Ukhrul cannot function from the District Headquarter due to threats from NSCN. However, Hon’ble
Justice A.K Goel and Mrs. Justice Anima Hazarika rejected the argument as it was based on political arguments and ask for legal justification.
Justice Goel while giving remarks to the Advocate General’s argument of alleged NSCN threat on the life of the Councilors as a reason for functioning at khuman lampak which is in Imphal East cites example of the rationality of MLAs shifting to Delhi for threat perception. The Justice further made it a point to emphasis on India’s polity of grassroots democracy. The Justice of the Double Bench while appreciating the prima facie case of the PIL transfers the case to from Guwahati to Imphal for reason of proximity and fixed the next hearing on 12 December.
