Manipur Assembly must be dissolved: Congress leader files plea in High Court

Manipur Congress president Keisham Meghachandra Singh has petitioned the Manipur High Court, challenging the “unconstitutional exercise of powers” by Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla to pave the way for President’s Rule in the State on February 13, 2025.

Through the petition, filed on January 29, the Congress leader also sought the dissolution of the remainder of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly under the provisions of Article 174(2) of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner requested the Chief Justice to consider the matter through an appropriate Division Bench.

Senior advocate Ningombam Bupenda Meitei represented the petitioner, while Deputy Solicitor-General Kh. Samarjit, assisted by N. Nongdamba, appeared for the Union of India. Advocate-General Lenin Hijam and Deputy government advocate O. Raran Kumar represented the Manipur government.

The court of Justice A. Guneshwar Sharma noted that the case involves the interpretation of Article 174 and referred it to the Chief Justice for placement before a Division Bench and listing of the case.

In July 2025, the State Congress chief sought a clarification from the government regarding the constitutional status of Manipur’s 60-member Assembly, which had not been convened since August 2024.

President’s Rule was imposed in the State four days after N. Biren Singh resigned as Chief Minister on February 9, 2025, amid the ongoing ethnic conflict.

The Congress president asked whether the 12thManipur Legislative Assembly “is still alive or already dead” or “constitutionally deemed to be dissolved from midnight” of February 11, two days before the imposition of President’s Rule.

Floor test

“The last sitting of the 60-member House was held on August 12, 2024, and according to Article 174(1) of the Constitution of India, the next sitting ought to have been mandatorily held on or before February 11. However, Mr. Biren Singh resigned as the Chief Minister on February 9. On that day, the Governor declared his January 24 order summoning the Assembly for February 11 to be null and void,” he wrote in a memorandum.

He pointed out that the Assembly was not in suspension at the time of the Chief Minister’s resignation, and Article 174(1), which mandates that no more than six months should elapse between two sittings of a Legislative Assembly, remained applicable.

He said the Governor’s February 9, 2025, order effectively “circumvented the rigours of Article 174(1)” and further delayed the Assembly’s sitting beyond the constitutionally permitted time frame. He added that any gubernatorial action or order requiring a new Chief Minister to undergo a floor test “would tantamount to the violation of Article 174(1)”.

Meanwhile, the Kangpokpi District Internally Displaced Welfare Committee rejected the March 31 deadline for the resettlement of the internally displaced persons, calling it unrealistic and unworkable in the absence of basic infrastructure.

In a statement, the committee urged the government to prioritise the construction of roads connecting key areas, provide adequate housing support, and revise the ₹3 lakh assistance provided under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana–Gramin to enable the displaced people to rebuild their homes with dignity.