SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Gau) 88

T.NANDAKUMAR SINGH
Manipur Human Rights Commission – Appellant
Versus
State of Manipur – Respondent


JUDGMENT

T.N.K. Singh, J.

1. Heard Mr. A. Nilamani Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Bimol, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned CGSC for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as well as Mr. Th. Ibohal, learned GA for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

2. The core question involved in the present writ petition is; whether the Human Rights Commission can file the present Writ Petition for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the State respondents to discharge their duties contemplated in Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

3. The short facts which will suffice for deciding the core question formulated above are that: "The Manipur Human Rights Commission" was constituted by the State Government of Manipur in exercising the power conferred by Section 21 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. By virtue of Section 29 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, provisions of Sections 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 shall also be applicable to the State Human Rights Commission, i.e., Manipur State Human Rights Commission subject to certain modifications. For easy reference, Section 29 of the Manipur Human Rights Act, 1993 is quoted hereunder:

29.



























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top