Rajkumar Surendra Singh vs State Of Manipur
2021 Latest Caselaw 15 Mani

                                       1


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                AT IMPHAL
                              (Video Conference)

W.P. (C) No. 108 of 2021
Rajkumar Surendra Singh                         ...Petitioner(s)

       Vs.
State of Manipur                                ...Respondent(s)

                            B E F O R E
                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KH. NOBIN SINGH
                                 O R D E R

10-02-2021

Heard Shri E. Premjit, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that they were appointed on promotion to the posts of Assistant Engineer in the year 2018. The private respondents were appointed directly on the recommendation of the MPSC in the year 2014. The validity and correctness of the appointment of the private respondents was questioned in a writ petition for which the judgment and order is reserved by Court No. 2. As the Tentative Seniority List was prepared showing the private respondents above the petitioners and after an objection being raised by the petitioners thereto, a Final Seniority List has been prepared showing the private respondents above the petitioners.

The validity and correctness of the Seniority List is being challenged by the petitioners in this writ petition on the inter alia grounds that the judgment and order has not yet been delivered by Court No. 2 as regards the validity and correctness of the appointment of the private respondents. In the Seniority List, it appears that the positions of the private respondents have not been made subject to the outcome of the writ petition for which the judgment and order has been reserved.

Without awaiting the pronouncement of the judgment and order, if a DPC is held considering the private respondents for further promotion to the posts of Executive Engineer, it may create a legal complication in the matter.

In view of the above, let notice be issued to the respondents, returnable in three weeks.

Smt. Th. Babita, learned counsel submits that he has filed a Caveat today on behalf of some of the respondents but the same is not on board. Since Smt. Th. Babita, learned counsel has filed a Caveat on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3, 6, 8 and 14, she accepts notice on behalf of them. As regards the remaining respondents, step be taken by the counsel appearing for the petitioners for service of notice upon them by speed post.

List the matter on 18-02-2021 so as to enable Shri Th. Vashum, learned Government Advocate to seek instruction in the matter and till then, no DPC be held for promotion to the posts of Executive Engineer, PHED.

Copies of this order shall be sent to the counsels appearing for the parties through their WhatsApp/e-mail.

                                                     JUDGE
Devananda


 Yumk       Digitally
            signed by

 ham        Yumkham
            Rother

 Rothe      Date:
            2021.02.10

 r          17:11:43
            +05'30'