Manipur High Court
Shri Huidrom Brojen Mangang vs The Jawaharlal Nehru Dance ... on 9 November, 2021
1
JOHN
TELEN KOM
Digitally signed by IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
JOHN TELEN KOM AT IMPHAL
Date: 2021.11.16
10:44:04 +05'30' WP(C) No.1058 of 2019
Shri Huidrom Brojen Mangang, aged about 40 years s/o Huidrom Konungjao
Mangang, resident of Yumnam Huidrom Makha Leikai, PO & PS Wangoi,
Imphal West District, Manipur-795009
...Petitioner
- Versus -
1. The Jawaharlal Nehru Dance Academy, Imphal represented by its
Director Having office at D.M. College Campus, Imphal-795001.
2. The Sangeet Natak Akademi, a society registered under the Societies
Registration Act, 1860 represented by its Secretary having office at
Rabindra Bhavan, Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi-1.
3. The Director, Jawaharlal Nehru Manipur Dance Academy, Imphal having
office at D.M. College Campus, Imphal- 795001.
4. Shri Kshetrimayum Sobhachandra Singh, s/o Kshetrimayum Manglem
Singh, resident of Kha Potshangbam Mayai Leikai, PO & PS Bishnupur,
Bishnupur District, Manipur-795126.
...Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.V. MURALIDARAN
For the Petitioner : Mr A. Sachikumar, Adv.
For the Respondents : Y. Nirmolchand, Sr. Adv.
Date of hearing & reserved : 27.10.2021
Date of Judgment & Order : 09.11.2021.
JUDGMENT & ORDER
(CAV)
[1] This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash
the appointment order dated 22.7.2019 issued in favour of the fourth
respondent and to consider the case of the other intending qualified candidates,
including the petitioner, for the post of Musician (Pena) in Jawaharlala Nehru
Manipur Dance Academy.
[2] The case of the petitioner is that the first respondent issued
advertisement dated 5.7.2018 calling applications from the intending
candidates for filling up one post of each of the vacant posts of (i) Guruhan (Lai
Haroaba), (ii) Guruhan (Cholam) and (iii) Musician (Pena) respectively to be
submitted on or before 23.7.2018. The petitioner and other intending
candidates had applied for the post of Musician (Pena) and the selection test
was held on 9.3.2019. However, no result of the selection test was declared,
but from the reliable source, the petitioner came to know that the fourth
respondent was appointed to the post of Musician (Pena) vide impugned order
dated 22.7.2019 of the Director of the first respondent.
[3] Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application dated 1.8.2019 for
obtaining information under Section 6(i) of the RTI Act seeking the State Public
Information Officer, Jawaharlala Nehru Manipur Dance Academy to issue a
copy of the appointment order dated 22.7.2019 and the certificates and mark
sheets of the fourth respondent for passing the qualifying Class-X examination.
The Administrative Officer/CPIO of JNMDA supplied the copies of the relevant
certificates and the appointment order of the fourth respondent and on
verification, the petitioner came to know that the fourth respondent had
produced a fake certificate of passing the qualifying Class-X examination and
the fourth respondent was appointed to the post of Musician (Pena) by not
considering the genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the
petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
[4] The respondents 1 to 3 filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that the
selection of the fourth respondent was notified in the office notice board and
the plea of the petitioner that the selection result was not declared is false. It is
stated that the fourth respondent resigned from his post by submitting
resignation letter dated 2.8.2021 and in view of the request for resignation, a
formal termination order was also issued on 16.8.2021 and the post of Musician
(Pena) is now lying vacant. It is stated that the post needs to be re-advertised
as the earlier advertisement was done on 5.7.2018 and appointment was given
to the fourth respondent on 22.7.2019. In such situation, the writ petition has
become infructuous and the same is liable to be dismissed.
[5] Heard Mr.A. Sachikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr. Y.Nirmolchand, learned senior counsel for the official respondents.
[6] The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by submitting
a fake Class-X certificate, the fourth respondent got appointment to the post of
Musician (Pena) and that the official respondents failed to see such fake
certificate produced by the fourth respondent. In such circumstances, the
official respondents ought not to have selected and appointed the fourth
respondent. In fact, the said factum of the fake certificate produced by the
fourth respondent came to the knowledge of the petitioner only after obtaining
RTI information from the Administrative Officer/CPIO of JNMDA, Imphal.
[7] The learned counsel would submit that the qualification for
appointing a person to the post of Musician (Pena) is Class-X passing and since
the fourth respondent has produced fake Class-X certificate, his appointment
needs to be cancelled and the respondent authorities ought to consider the
genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner.
[8] The learned counsel for the official respondents submitted that it
is incorrect to say that the result of the selection test was not declared and
instead issued the appointment order to the fourth respondent. The learned
counsel would submit that the selection of the fourth respondent was notified in
the office notice board.
[9] Drawing attention to paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition, the
learned senior counsel for the official respondents submitted that the
genuineness of the educational qualification of the fourth respondent needs to
be verified. However, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the matter was delayed. The
learned senior counsel further submitted that the fourth respondent has
resigned the post and now the post of Musician (Pena) is lying vacant and that
the said post needs to be re-advertised. The learned senior counsel for the
official respondents thus submitted that recording the averments in paragraph
6 of the affidavit-in-opposition, suitable orders may be passed by this Court.
[10] At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
he is agreeable to dispose of the writ petition by recording the averments made
in paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition. However, he submits that instead
of re-advertising the post, the official respondents may consider the genuine
cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner.
[11] The writ petition was filed on 19.12.2019 challenging the
appointment of the fourth respondent as Musician (Pena) and after the filing of
the writ petition, a subsequent development of submitting resignation by the
fourth respondent was happened in this case and the said fact was averred by
the official respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition. Therefore, for better
appreciation, it would be necessary to quote paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-
opposition:
"6. That, with reference to Paragraph No.9 of the writ petition, the
answering deponent denies the averments made therein. The
genuineness of the educational qualification of private respondent
needs to be verified by the academy from the institution that issued
his educational certificates. However, the matter was delayed due
to COVID-19 Pandemic and in addition to that the private
respondent has resigned from his post by submitting resignation
lette r dated 02/08/2021. In view of the request for resignation
from his post i.e. Musician (Pena), a formal termination order of
the private respondent was also issued vide order No.4(21)79-
80/JNMDA dated 16/08/2021. In such situation, the whole writ
petition has become infructuous. The post of Musician (Pena) is
now lying vacant and the post needs to be re-advertised as the
earlier advertisement was done on 5/7/2018 and appointment was
given to the respondent No.4 on 22/7/2019."
[12] While considering the appointment of a candidate for the post of
Musician (Pena), it is the bounden duty of the selecting/appointing authority to
verify not only the genuineness of the candidate but also it has to verify the
certificates, particularly the educational qualification certificate produced by the
candidate. Thus, a person who is unqualified at the time of submission of the
application for the post of Musician (Pena) in JNMDA, Imphal was appointed to
the said post by superseding the qualified persons like the petitioner and others.
There is every possibility to come to a conclusion that only after
knowing that his Class-X certificate is going to be subjected for verification from
the educational institution, the fourth respondent resigned post.
[13] Since the subsequent development of resignation of the fourth
respondent from the post of Musician (Pena) had taken place and the post
Musician (Pena) is now lying vacant in JNMDA, Imphal, the official respondents
ought to have consider the other intending qualified candidates, including the
petitioner for the post of Musician (Pena) without re-advertising the post, since
the petitioner and other intending candidates were called for interview
scheduled on 9.3.2019 at 11 a.m. at JMDA. If re-advertising the post as
pleaded by the official respondents is ordered, it would not only delay the filling
up of the post but also all other eligibility criteria would be changed. In such
circumstances, the official respondents are directed to consider the other
intending candidates, including the petitioner for filling up the post of Musician
(Pena) by following the due process.
[14] In the result,
(a) The writ petition is allowed.
(b) The appointment order dated 22.7.2019 issued in
favour of the fourth respondent is set aside.
(c) The official respondents are directed to consider the
genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including
the petitioner and appoint suitable candidate after
following the procedures.
(d) The said exercise is directed to be completed within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
(e) No costs.
JUDGE
FR/NFR
John Kom
