NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO(S). 3752-3753/2018

(ARISING FROM SLP (C) NOS.37281-37282/2017)

TONGBRAM BIMOLCHAND SINGH & ORS.                   APPELLANT(S)

                               VERSUS

YUMLEMBAM SURJIT SINGH & ORS. ETC.                 RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. The appellants are before this Court aggrieved by

the interim order dated 20.11.2017 passed by the High

Court of Manipur at Imphal directing re-verification

of  the  answer  scripts  of  all  the  candidates  who

participated in the selection conducted by the MPSC

for Manipur Civil Services.

3. The appellants contended before this Court that

it  was  not  necessary  to  conduct  an  all  pervasive

inquiry and the same should be limited to the writ

petitioners.

4. In view of the above submission, on 11.01.2018,

while issuing notice, the following order was passed

by this Court:-

“Issue notice.

For the time being, the scope of inquiry,

1

as directed by the learned Single Judge of

the High Court, shall be limited only to

the  answer  sheets  of  the  candidates  who

have approached the High Court.”

5. Thereafter,  this  Court  directed  the  Committee

appointed by the High Court to submit a Report to

this Court.  In the Report filed by the Committee, it

is  stated  that  there  had  been  quite  a  few

irregularities.  In that background, on 23.03.2018,

this Court passed the following order:-

“The High Court of Manipur has forwarded

a report of the Committee, which conducted

verification  of  the  answer  sheets  of  the

petitioners.  It is reported that there have

been quite a few irregularities.  If that be

so,  Sh.  Prashant  Bhushan,  learned  counsel

appearing for the intervenors, prays that in

view  of  the  report  of  the  Committee,  re-

verification may be conducted in respect of

other candidates, since the total number of

candidates are only 1068.   

In  view  of  the  report  of  the  Committee,

whether  any  further  verification  is  to  be

conducted at all, is itself a question.   

The learned counsel appearing for the Manipur

Public  Service  Commission  seeks  two  weeks'

2

time to file response to the report of the

Committee and on further course of action.    

Post on 12.04.2018.“

6. Heard  Mr.  Tushar  Mehta,  learned  Additional

Solicitor General of India appearing for the State of

Manipur,  Mr.  V.  Giri,  learned  senior  counsel

appearing  for  the  MPSC,  Mr.  Debel  Kumar  Banerjee,

learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  appellant

and Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel appearing

for the party respondents.

7. Having regard to the indications in the Report of

the Committee, we are of the view that it is in the

interest of justice that the process, as directed by

the  High  Court,  should  not  be  disturbed.

Accordingly,  we  dispose  of  these  appeals  with  a

direction  to  the  Committee  to  undertake  the

verification,  as  directed  by  the  High  Court,

expeditiously,  in any  case within  a period  of six

weeks  from  today.   Thereafter,  the  Committee  will

submit a Report to the High Court and the High Court

may  dispose  of  the  matter  expeditiously,  having

regard to the Report of the Committee.

8. We  make  it  clear  that  we  have  not  otherwise

considered the appeals on merits and it is for the

High Court to consider the merits of the matters.

9. The appeals are, accordingly, disposed of.

3

10. Pending  applications,  if  any,  shall  stand

disposed of.

11. There shall be no orders as to costs.

.......................J.               [KURIAN JOSEPH]  

.......................J.               [MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR]  

.......................J.               [NAVIN SINHA]  

NEW DELHI; APRIL 12, 2018.

4