NG BIJOY SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR, THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri B.P. Sahu, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Shri S. Niranjan, the learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.

(2.) By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents to restore the guard-cum-escort personnel which were withdrawn from him vide wireless message dated 20-11-2017, impugned herein, issued by the I.G. of Police (AP/Ops.), Government of Manipur.

(3.) The facts of the case as narrated in the writ petition are that the petitioner is an Ex-MLA of Khurai Assembly Constituency to whom Y-Category security was provided by the State Government. Prior to his being elected as MLA, the petitioner held various important posts viz. the Director (RIMS), the Vice-Chancellor (Manipur University), the Chairman, Manipur Pollution Control Board, etc. While he was holding the said posts, he was provided with adequate security. On 20-11-2017, the Inspector General of Police (AP/Ops.), Manipur issued a wireless message in lieu of MSG FORM to all concerned informing them that guard-cum-escort personnel provided to persons enumerated therein including the petitioner, have been withdrawn due to the requirement of large number of manpower in connection with the visit of the Hon'ble President of India. After the Hon'ble President of India having left Manipur, the petitioner submitted a letter dated 29-11-2017 to the DGP, Manipur requesting him to restore the guard-cum-escort personnel but to no effect and accordingly, the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on the inter-alia grounds that the guard-cum-escort personnel which were withdrawn from some of the Ex-MLAs, has been restored; that some of the candidates of the ruling party who was not elected as MLA, has also been provided with the guard-cum-escort personnel for their protection; that the petitioner is under continuous threat as a result of which he is unable to move out from his house; that during his tenure as the Vice-Chancellor (M.U), the petitioner was even kidnapped by insurgent groups and was kept in their custody for about fifteen days and that while proving the guard-cum-escort personnel to similarly situated persons, the denial of the same to the petitioner is malafide and malicious.