IMPHAL, India, April 26 -- Manipur High Court issued the following order on March 25:

[1] WP(C) No. 218 of 2026 with MC(WP(C) No. 233 of 2026: Heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Y. Jinita, learned counsel for the petitioner.

[2] The matter was listed on 24.03.2026 and the matter is listed today for hearing on motion.

[3] It is stated that State respondent has awarded a contract for development of water supply project in Bishnupur District bearing work No. EE/BPR/PHE/WO(NDB/21-22/01 dated 15.10.2021 and respondent No. 4 and petitioner have entered into contract of local facilitator agreement dated 14.02.2024. In terms of contract dated 14.02.2024, the petitioner has purchased GI and DI Pipes for the contract on behalf of the contractor to be supplied to the State respondents and also deposited a bank guarantee of Rs. 12,99,88,000/-.

[4] In the present petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the notification dated 09.03.2026 issued by the Executive Engineer, Bishnupur PHED (respondent No. 4) to the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Manipur University Campus, Canchipur, Imphal West (respondent No. 5) for encashment of bank guarantee submitted by the petitioner.

[5] Issue notice to the respondents.

[6] Mr. Y. Robert, learned Dy. G.A. assisting Mr. S. Nepolean, learned G.A. accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and petitioner is directed to take step to respondent Nos. 4 & 5 by speed post and dasti in addition.

[7] Interim order dated 24.03.2026 is extended till the next date.

[8] List this case on 07.04.2026.

[9] WP(C) No. 194 of 2026 with MC(WP(C) No. 203 of 2026: Present Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Y. Jinita, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Nepolean, learned G.A. assisted by Mr. Y. Robert, learned Dy. G.A. for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Aasthana, learned counsel along with Mr. A. Arunkumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4. Hence service is complete on all the respondents.

[10] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel, submits that as per the agreement dated 14.02.2024 executed between the petitioner and respondent No. 4, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction in terms of clause 14 of the agreement and as per clause 13.2, the petitioner has to approach the sole arbitrator in case of dispute arising out of the agreement and he prays for one week's time for filing counter affidavit. The dispute is regarding a private contract between the petitioner and respondent No. 4 and is not a subject matter of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

[11] List this case on 07.04.2026.

[12] Earlier interim order is extended till the next date.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.