Facts
The 5th Manipur Panchayat term (elected in 2017) expired in 2022
Source reference: para. 2Due to the state's failure to conduct elections for the 6th Panchayat, the Single Judge initially allowed outgoing members to continue functioning
Source reference: para. 2This was challenged by the State, leading to a Division Bench judgment on 29.08.2025 (“Order under Review”), which set aside the extension of elected members, held that the Panchayat tenure cannot exceed 5 years under Article 243E, and directed elections within 6 months
Source reference: para. 3The State subsequently moved this review, citing administrative difficulties, the imposition of President's Rule (w.e.f. 13.02.2025), and a 2023 amendment to the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act transitioning the system from a 2-tier to a 3-tier structure
Source reference: para. 4, 12, 13Issues
1. Whether the direction to conduct fresh elections within 6 months (sub-para x of para 64) should be extended given the 2023 legislative amendment and administrative constraints?
Source reference: para. 8, 352. Whether the State should be permitted to appoint representative "Administrative Committees" for Zila Parishads under Section 109 instead of individual "Administrators" under Section 92?
Source reference: para. 7, 39, 403. Whether third-party review petitioners (erstwhile committee members) are entitled to pending honorariums and bills for works executed prior to the quashing of their appointments?
Source reference: para. 5, 24Law Applied
Article 243E of the Constitution of India, which mandates a 5-year duration for Panchayats
Source reference: para. 37Section 20 of the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which mirrors this constitutional limit
Source reference: para. 37Section 22 regarding the appointment of Administrative Committees for Gram Panchayats (limited to 6 months)
Source reference: para. 36, 37Section 92 concerning Administrators for Zila Parishads
Source reference: para. 36, 43The "Removal of Difficulties" clause under Section 109 to harmonize representative governance with statutory gaps
Source reference: para. 40, 43The principle of Expressio unius est exclusio alterius as argued by respondents to interpret statutory mandates
Source reference: para. 23The precedent in Rattanindia Power Limited v. MSEDCL, regarding the finality of order parts not challenged by a party
Source reference: para. 31Reasoning
The court noted that while Article 243E is mandatory, the 2023 amendment to the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act (introducing Sections 110-139) fundamentally altered the Panchayat structure to a 3-tier system, necessitating a recalibration of the election timeline
Source reference: para. 12, 13, 33The Court recognized the State Election Commission's undertaking to conduct elections by 16.10.2026 as a reasonable adjustment
Source reference: para. 14, 44Regarding Zila Parishads, the Court found that Section 92(1) strictly applied to stays of election or mass resignations, which did not cover "expiry of tenure"; therefore, Section 109 was the appropriate vehicle to prevent an administrative vacuum
Source reference: para. 41-43By reading Section 109 in harmony with the spirit of Section 22, the Court reasoned that a multi-member "Administrative Committee" was more representative and legally sound than a single "Administrator" for Zila Parishads, provided the tenure did not exceed 6 months
Source reference: para. 40, 43Holding
The Court partially allowed the State’s review petitions, modifying the 29.08.2025 order to (i) extend the period for conducting 3-tier elections to on or before 16.10.2026
(ii) permit the State to appoint Administrative Committees for Zila Parishads (not exceeding 6 months) under Section 109 read with Section 92
Source reference: para. 44(ii)The Court held that the legality of "multiple successive appointments" was left open for future adjudication
Source reference: para. 44(iii)For the third-party petitioners, the Court directed the State to release all legitimate pending honorariums and bills for works already executed during their prior tenure. All miscellaneous applications were closed
Source reference: para. 45Original Court PDF
State of Manipur and 7 OrsvsPheiroijam Heramani and 16 Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in