Manipur High Court
The State Of Manipur Represented ... vs Dr. Heigrujam Wanglensana on 5 April, 2021
Digitally signed
MAYANG by
MAYANGLAMB
LAMBAM AM CHANU Item No. 25
CHANU NANDINI
Date:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
NANDINI 2021.04.07
11:02:24 +05'30' AT IMPHAL
W.A. No. 56 of 2019
1. The State of Manipur represented by the Principal Secretary (Health &
Family Welfare), Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat,
Imphal, Manipur - 795001.
2. State Health Mission Society, Manipur represented by the State
Mission Director, Medical Directorate, Government of Manipur,
Lamphel, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur -
795004.
3. The Director, AYUSH, Government of Manipur, Medical Directorate,
Government of Manipur, Lamphel, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West
District, Manipur - 795004.
4. The Director of Health Services, Government of Manipur, Medical
Directorate, Lamphel, Imphal West Manipur, P.O. & P.S. Imphal,
Imphal West District, Manipur - 795004.
5. The Director of Family Welfare, Government of Manipur, Family
Welfare Road Khwairamband Bazar, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West
District, Manipur- 795001.
.......Appellants
- versus -
1. Dr. Heigrujam Wanglensana, aged about 37 years old, S/o Dr. H.
Indramani Singh of Naoremthong Laishram Leirak, P.O. Imphal, P.S.
Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur - 795001.
2. Dr. Karam Ranita Devi, aged about 32 years, D/O K. Narendra Singh
of Singjamei Thokchom Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Singjamei, Imphal West
District, Manipur - 795008.
3. Dr. Mohd. Firoj Khan, aged about 39 years old, S/o Md. Fajur Rahman
of Heibong Makhong Awang Leikai, Mayang Imphal, P.O. & P.S.
Mayang Imphal, District Thoubal, Manipur - 795001.
4. Dr. Md. Salim Khan, aged about 37 years, S/o Md. Din Muhomad of
Mayang Imphal Bengun, P.O. & P.S. Mayang Imphal, Imphal West
District, Manipur - 795001.
W.A. No. 56 of 2019 Page 1 f 5
5. Dr. Kiranmala Maishnam, aged about 40 years old D/O M. Naba
Singh, Thangmeiband Hijam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West
District, Manipur - 795001.
6. Dr. Chongnu, aged about 39 years old, D/o S. Mangchan Haokip of M.
Songgel, P.O. & P.S. Churachandpur, Churachandpur District, Manipur
- 795128.
7. Dr. Maibam Basandrara Devi, aged about 44 years old, D/o M. Irabot
Singh of Sagolband Moirang Mayum Leirak, P.O. & P.S. Imphal,
Imphal West District, Manipur - 795001.
8. Dr. Th. Md. Faridur Rahman, aged about 35 years old, S/O Md.
Habibur Rahman of Lilong Awang Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Lilong, District
Thoubal, Manipur - 795130.
......Principal Respondents
9. Union of India represented by the Secretary, Health and Family
Welfare, Government of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare,
Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi - 110001.
.....Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR
For the appellants : Mr. N. Kumarjit, Advocate General, Manipur
For the respondents : Mrs. Th. Babita, Advocate
Date of hearing & order : 05.04.2021
O R D E R
[Sanjay Kumar, CJ]
[1] Heard Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur
appearing for the appellants, and Mrs. Th. Babita, learned counsel appearing
for the respondents.
W.A. No. 56 of 2019 Page 2 f 5
[2] The State of Manipur and its Health Department Officials are in
appeal against the judgment and order dated 02.04.2019 passed by a learned
Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1115 of 2018 and the order dated
06.08.2019 passed by the learned Judge in Review Petition No. 14 of 2019.
[3] The prayer of the writ petitioners, 8 in number, in W.P.(C) No.
1115 of 2018 was to direct the State of Manipur and its Health Department to
maintain parity between the AYUSH Doctors and Allopathic Doctors working in
the State Health Mission Society, Manipur, under the National Rural Health
Mission by applying the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.
[4] By the judgment and order dated 02.04.2019, the learned Judge
disposed of the writ petition directing the State Government and in particular,
the State Health Mission Society, to consider the claim of AYUSH Doctors and
take appropriate steps to ensure that they are treated equally with Allopathic
Doctors as regards their pay, in the light of the Manipur Health Services Rules,
1982, as amended in the year, 2015, and the Manipur Services (Revised Pay)
Rules, 2010.
[5] Aggrieved by these directions, the State and its Health
Department officials sought review of the order by way of Review Petition No.
14 of 2019. However, the learned Judge rejected the review petition by order
dated 06.08.2019. Therein, the learned Judge noted that the authorities were
merely directed to consider the case of AYUSH Doctors and no direction had
been issued to treat AYUSH Doctors and Allopathic Doctors on par. The learned
Judge further noted that the judgment and order only required the authorities
W.A. No. 56 of 2019 Page 3 f 5
to consider the case of the writ petitioners in the light of the relevant rules and
dismissed the review petition opining that it was devoid of merit.
[6] Aggrieved by the aforestated two orders, the present writ appeal
was preferred. Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur, would
contend that the concluding portion of the judgment and order dated
02.04.2019 visited a positive mandate upon the authorities to ensure that
AYUSH Doctors were treated equally with Allopathic Doctors as regards their
pay. He would however concede that the Review Order dated 06.08.2019 made
it clear that no positive direction had been issued by the learned Judge and the
matter required to be considered by the authorities in the light of the relevant
rules. Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur would state that it
would suffice at the stage if this aspect of the matter is clarified in clear terms.
[7] Mrs. Th. Babita, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents/writ petitioners, would state that a decision has already been
taken by the Government as regards payment of remuneration to AYUSH
Doctors on par with Allopathic Doctors who are working in the State Health
Society/National Health Mission. She would rely on the letter dated 27.08.2020
addressed by the Joint Secretary (Health & FW), Government of Manipur, to the
State Mission Director, State Health Society / National Health Mission, Manipur,
reflecting the State Cabinet's decision to this effect in its meeting held on
22.07.2020.
[8] In the light of the aforestated facts and circumstances, we are of
the opinion that nothing remains to be adjudicated in this appeal. A cumulative
W.A. No. 56 of 2019 Page 4 f 5
reading of the orders passed by the learned Judge demonstrate that it is for the
authorities concerned to consider the claim of the respondents/writ petitioners
in the light of the rules and take a decision. In the event the aforestated
cabinet decision, embodied in the letter dated 27.08.2020 placed before this
Court, reflects such consideration culminating in a policy decision, it is for the
State and its Health Department Officials to abide thereby and extend the
benefit thereof to the respondents/writ petitioners also. However, if the matter
still requires further consideration in the light of the rules, it is for the
authorities to undertake such an exercise, as directed by the learned Judge,
and take a final decision.
[9] The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of making it clear that the
authorities shall take appropriate action in the matter as indicated above
expeditiously.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
FR/NFR
bipin
W.A. No. 56 of 2019 Page 5 f 5
