Date: 2022.02.25 vs The State Of Manipur
2022 Latest Caselaw 65 Mani

                                                                                            Page |1


SHAMUR Digitally
         by
                 signed
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AILATPA SHAMURAILATP
         AM SUSHIL
                                                  AT IMPHAL

M SUSHIL SHARMA                                  WP(C) No. 679 of 2018
         Date: 2022.02.25
SHARMA 12:29:56 +05'30'
                              D. Toshim Maring, aged about 26 years, D/o Modum
                              Maring, resident of Waithou Phunal Khunjao, Imphal
                              East District, Manipur.

                                                                            -- -- -- Petitioner

                                                 - VERSUS-

                              1. The     State    of    Manipur,     represented      by   the
                                 Commissioner (Health), Government of Manipur.

                              2. The     Director      of   Health       Services,   Manipur,
                                 Government of Manipur, Lamphel, P.O. & P.S.
                                 Lamphel-795004.
                                                                           ..... Respondents

WP(C) No. 734 of 2018

Huten Sofia Anal, aged about 27 years, D/o Huten Thursel Anal, resident of Lambung, Panchai Vilage, P.O. & P.S. Chandel, Chandel District, Manipur.

-- -- -- Petitioner

- VERSUS-

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018 Page |2

1. The State of Manipur, represented by the Commissioner (Health), Government of Manipur, Secretariat, Imphal-795001.

2. The Director of Health Services, Manipur, Government of Manipur, Lamphel, P.O. & P.S. Lamphel-795004.

..... Respondents

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.V. MURALIDARAN

For the Petitioners :: Mr. S. Rajeetchandra, Advocate

For the Respondents :: Mr.H. Debendra, GA

Date of Hearing and reserving Judgment & Order :: 21.01.2022

Date of Judgment & Order :: 24.02.2022

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners

seeking a direction on the respondents to initiate procedure for

calling the wait listed candidates to fill up the vacant post of staff

nurses.

2. Heard Mr. S. Rajeetchandra, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. H. Debendra, learned Government Advocate

for the respondents.

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018 Page |3

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

Directorate of Health Services, Manipur, published notification

dated 5.5.2016 inviting applications from intending candidates for

recruitment to various posts in the Department. Amongst the

posts, 163 vacant posts of staff nurse were shown advertised with

relevant reservation quota for SC/ST, PWD and OBC etc. The

petitioners having the requisite qualifications and falling under ST

category submitted their applications along with the relevant

documents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted

that the Department had published a final list of the eligible

candidates of staff nurse, wherein the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.679

of 2018 was shown at Serial No.84 and the petitioner in W.P.(C)

No.734 of 2018 was shown at Serial No.160. According to learned

counsel, as per the mode of appointment, there being no written

test, the petitioners have attended the viva-voce held on

19.11.2016 conducted by the Department. While so, on

20.12.2016, the Department had published the final list of selected

candidates numbering 162 and another 21 names as wait listed

candidates for appointment to the vacant posts of staff nurse,

wherein the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.679 of 2018 was shown as

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018 Page |4

wait list No.1 and the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.734 of 2018 was

shown as wait list No.10 under the ST quota. However, they have

not been given appointment by operating the wait list till date.

Hence, they have filed the writ petitions seeking direction on the

respondents to initiate the procedure for calling wait listed

candidates to fill up the vacant post of staff nurse.

5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate for the

respondent State contended that there is no legitimate right vested

in the petitioners to get themselves to be appointed, as they are in

the waiting list and the waiting list has not been operated by the

Government. Moreover, the validity period of wait list has already

been lapsed or otherwise expired.

6. This Court considered the submissions raised by

learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials

available on record.

7. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are in

wait list to be operated for appointment to the post of staff nurse

pursuant to the notification dated 5.5.2016 and the selection list

dated 20.12.2016. According to the petitioners, since many

selected candidates who were given offer forms chose not to join

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018 Page |5

the service, the petitioners have approached the concerned

authorities for issuing offer form as they being in wait list. In fact,

the wait listed candidates, including the petitioners, have made a

joint representation to the Minister for Health and Family Welfare

on 01.07.2017 to consider them for appointment as staff nurse

under the Health Department against the vacant posts of staff

nurse lying pin the Department during the life span of wait list

prepared by the authority. However, the same has not been

considered by the respondent State.

8. On a perusal of the representation dated 01.07.2017,

this Court finds that the wait listed candidates, including the

petitioners themselves stated that the wait list panel is valid for

next 18 months i.e. till 18.05.2018. These writ petitions are said to

have been filed on 25.07.2018 and 08.08.2018 respectively. Thus,

according to the petitioners, on the date of filing of the writ

petitions itself, the wait list got expired. Therefore, the question of

considering the waiting list alleged by the petitioners does not.

9. It is pertinent to mention that there is no legitimate

right vested in the petitioners to get themselves to be appointed by

operating the wait list. That apart, according to the respondents,

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018 Page |6

the waiting list has not been operated by the Government and the

validity period of wait list has already been lapsed.

10. Since the Court cannot force the respondent State to

operate the wait list and there is no legitimate right vested in the

petitioners and the fact that the wait list got expired before filing of

the writ petition, this Court is of the view that the prayer in the writ

petitions has rendered infructuous.

11. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed as

infructuous. No costs.

12. Registry is directed to issue copy of this order to both

the parties through their WhatsApp/e-mail.

JUDGE

FR/NFR

Sushil

WP(C) No. 679 of 2018 and WP(C) No. 734 of 2018