Manipur High Court
The State Of Manipur vs Ms. Paonam Lily Chanu on 14 February, 2022
KABORA Digitally signed Item Nos. 19 & 20
(Through Video Conferencing)
by
MBAM KABORAMBAM
SANDEEP SANDEEP SINGH IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
Date: 2022.02.16
SINGH 15:24:01 +05'30' AT IMPHAL
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with
MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022
1. The State of Manipur, represented by the Commissioner/
Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Secretariat, Old
Block, Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
2. The Director General of Police, Manipur, Manipur Police
Headquarter, near New Secretariat, Babupara, P.O. & P.S.
Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
3. The Director (Youth Affairs & Sports), Government of Manipur,
Directorate of Youth Affairs & Sports, Khuman Lampak, Imphal,
P.O. Imphal, P.S. Porompat, Imphal West District,
Manipur - 795001.
...Appellants
- Versus -
Ms. Paonam Lily Chanu, aged about 34 years, D/O (L) P. Shyam
Kanhai Singh, resident of Sagolband Khamnam Bazar, Soyam
Leirak, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District,
Manipur - 795004.
...Respondent
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
For the appellants/applicants : Mr. N. Kumarjit, Advocate General
For the respondent : Mr. A. Mohendro, Advocate
Date of Order : 14.02.2022
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 Page 1
ORDER (ORAL)
Sanjay Kumar (C.J.):
[1] The State of Manipur and its officials are in appeal against the
Judgment and Order dated 27.09.2021 passed by a learned Judge of this Court in
W.P. (C) No. 628 of 2020. By way of MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 filed therein, they
also seek stay of the impugned Judgment and Order.
[2] Heard Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur,
appearing for the appellants/applicants; and Mr. A. Mohendro, learned counsel,
appearing for the respondent.
[3] W.P. (C) No. 628 of 2020 was filed by the respondent herein
seeking a direction to the authorities to consider her case for appointment to a
suitable post in the Police Department, Manipur, taking into account her
meritorious achievements in the field of sports (Archery), in terms of the Office
Memorandum dated 17.10.1998 issued by the Department of Personnel &
Administrative Reforms (Personnel Division), Government of Manipur.
[4] It is not in dispute that the respondent is highly meritorious in
Archery and represented India at National and International levels. In addition to
her credentials in the field of Archery, she also holds a B.A. degree in Geography
(Hons.) from Manipur University. She submitted representation dated 11.12.2017
seeking appointment to a suitable post, preferably as an Inspector of Police in the
Home Department, Government of Manipur, by virtue of her sports achievements.
[5] As no action was taken thereon, she filed the subject writ petition.
Pursuant to the interim order dated 21.01.2021 passed therein, the process was
initiated but there was no real positive development. The police department
merely requested the Home Department to take necessary further action stating,
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 Page 2
inter alia, that if the petitioner was meritorious in sports, she could appear in the
recruitment test for appointment to Class-III/Class-IV posts, against vacancies
meant for meritorious sports persons under the reserved quota.
[6] Significantly, the respondent had earlier filed W.P. (C) No. 84 of
2017 before this Court seeking employment in the Directorate of Youth Affairs and
Sports on the strength of her sports achievements. By order dated 24.03.2017,
this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the State authorities to
consider her earlier representation dated 15.07.2015 within a time frame.
However, no fruitful result emerged from the exercise at that point of time.
[7] Taking note of the aforestated details and also the fact that Mirabai
Chanu, a Silver Medallist in the recent Olympics, was given appointment as an
Additional Superintendent of Police by the State Government, the learned Judge
expressed the view that the Government should extend the same benefit to the
respondent herein. The learned Judge accordingly allowed the writ petition and
directed the State authorities to appoint her, preferably as an Inspector of Police
in the Police Department of Manipur, on the strength of her meritorious
achievements in the field of Archery. This exercise was directed to be completed
within a time frame
[8] Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur, would state
that the Office Memorandum dated 17.10.1998 holds the field in so far as
recruitment of meritorious sportspersons is concerned and contend that the
learned Judge ought to have directed 'consideration' of the respondent's case
thereunder instead of issuing a positive direction for her appointment within a time
frame. He would further state that, in terms of the said Office Memorandum, such
appointment is to be given only to Class-III and Class-IV posts, whereas the post
of Inspector of Police is a Class-I/Class-II post.
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 Page 3
[9] However, we find that the Office Memorandum dated 17.10.1998
does not restrict recruitment of meritorious sportspersons only through the routine
procedure of regular recruitment through advertisement. This aspect is clear from
Clause-5 of the said Office Memorandum which deals with seniority. It is provided
therein that sportspersons recruited by the department in relaxation of the
recruitment procedure should be placed en bloc junior to those who have already
been recommended by the selection committee. It is not even the case of the
authorities that they did not undertake any recruitment on regular basis since the
year 2017 and, therefore, they could not consider the respondent's candidature.
In consequence, it is not necessary that the respondent should await the next
regular recruitment drive for securing appointment on the strength of her sports
achievements. That was not the procedure followed even in the case of the
Olympics Silver Medalist. Be it noted that the respondent's application dates back
to the year 2017 and no positive steps have been taken by the State authorities to
act upon it despite the lapse of nearly 5 years. The respondent represented India
at International events and secured Gold, Silver and Bronze Medals. She secured
several such medals even at National events also. There is no reason as to why
her case should be kept in cold storage for such a long time, despite her clear
merit and entitlement to be considered for recruitment under the sports quota.
[10] The record reflects that the authorities have only resorted to the
usual bureaucratic red-tape and kept the case pending for one reason or the
other. In such circumstances, we find no irregularity in the learned Judge issuing
a positive direction instead of a mere direction to 'consider'. A deserving party
cannot be made to run from pillar to post again and again.
As regards the other ground of attack, it may be noted that the
Office Memorandum, which dates back to over two decades, provided for
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 Page 4
meritorious sports candidates being appointed only to Class-III and Class-IV
posts. However, the prevalent practice seems to be more in breach of this
mandate. The recent appointment of the Olympics Silver Medalist to a much
higher post clearly shows that there is no hard and fast rule in this regard. As the
respondent also secured several medals at International events, she is not any
less deserving. The direction of the learned Judge to accommodate her in the
post of Inspector of Police therefore does not warrant any modification.
On the above analysis, we find no grounds whatsoever to interfere
with the Judgment and Order under appeal.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
In consequence, MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 is also dismissed.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
W.A. No. 16 of 2022
with MC (W.A.) No. 34 of 2022 Page 5
