Manipur High Court
Shri Samom Tomba Singh vs Shri Nameirakpam Nodiachand ... on 14 June, 2022
KABOR Digitally signed Item No. 17-19
AMBAM byKABORAMBAM
SANDEE SANDEEP SINGH
Date: 2022.06.14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
16:07:50 +05'30'
P SINGH
W.A. No. 55 of 2022
With
MC (W.A.) No. 107 of 2022
With
MC (W.A.) No. 108 of 2022
Shri Samom Tomba Singh, aged about 59 years, S/o (L) S. Indramani
Singh, resident of Uripok Huidrom Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Imphal,
Imphal West District, Manipur-795001.
Appellant
-Versus-
1. Shri Nameirakpam Nodiachand Singh, aged about 85 years, S/o
(L) N. Thambaljao Singh, resident of Uripok Yambem Leikai,
P.O. Imphal, P.S. lamphel, Imhal West District, Manipur-795001.
2. Shri Sarangthem Kulla Singh, aged about 83 years, S/o
(L) S. Jatra Singh, resident of Uripok Yambem Leikai, P.O. Imphal,
P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur-795001.
3. Shri Thoidingjam Ibomcha Singh, aged about 43 years,
S/o Th. Brajamohon Singh, resident of Uyumpok Mamang Leikai,
P.O. Pangei, P.S. Sagolmang, Imphal East District,
Manipur - 795114.
4. Smt. Yambem Modhubala Devi, aged about 51 years,
D/o (L) Y. Nodiachand, resident of Uripok Achom Leikai,
P.O. Imphal, P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District,
Manipur-795001.
Principal Respondents
5. The State of Manipur represented by the Commissioner/Secretary
(Education/S), Government of Manipur, Secretariat, Imphal.
6. The Director of Education (S), Govt. of Manipur, Imphal, Manipur.
Official Respondents
W.A. No. 55 of 2022; & Ors. Page 1
7. Smt. Shamurailatpam Dabayanti Devi, aged about 52 years,
W/o Late Priyobarta Sharma, a resident of Sagolband Thangjam
Leirak, P.O. & PS. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur.
8. Smt. Shamurailatpam Usha Devi, aged about 50 years, wife of
Mahanta Sharma, resident of Sagolband Thangjam Leirak,
P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur.
9. Shri T. Tikendrajit Singh, C/o Head Mistress, Shakhi Devi Girls'
High School, Uripok Yambem Leikai.
10. Shri Th. Ibopishak Singh, aged about 66 years, Son of late
Th. Ibomcha Singh, resident of Naoremthong Khulem Leikai,
P.O. & P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur.
11. Smt. Kangujam Anita Devi, aged about 50 years, W/o Late
Kshetrimayum Ibomcha Singh, resident of Singjamei Kshetri
Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Singjamei, District Imphal East, Manipur.
12. Tourangbam Bimolini Devi, wife of Lairenjam Nongyai Singh,
resident of Uripok Achom Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West
District, Manipur.
13. Smt. W. Nalini Devi, wife of L. Ingobi Singh, resident of
Mongsangei Konjeng Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Singjamei, Imphal West
District, Manipur.
Proforma Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MV MURALIDARAN
For the appellant : Kh. Tarunkumar, Advocate
For respondents No. 1-4 : Mr. Th. Henba, Advocate
:
For respondents No. 5 & 6 Mr. S. Nepolean, G.A.
Date of Order : 14.06.2022
W.A. No. 55 of 2022; & Ors. Page 2
ORDER (ORAL)
Sanjay Kumar (C.J.):
[1] The appellant in this writ appeal is respondent No. 10 in W.P. (C) No.
822 of 2017. The said writ petition was filed by respondents No. 1 - 4 herein and
was allowed by a learned Judge of this Court, vide judgment & order dated
08.02.2022. The challenge in the said writ petition was to the order dated
10.10.2016 issued by the Secretary, School Managing Committee, Shakhi Devi Girls'
High School, Uripok, Imphal, whereby respondents No. 7, 8, 9 & 10 in the writ
petition were promoted as temporary teachers at Shakhi Devi Girls' High School,
and to the order dated 10.10.2016 issued by the Zonal Education Officer/ Zone-I,
Government of Manipur, approving the said promotions.
[2] Heard Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned counsel for the appellant;
Mr. Th. Henba, learned counsel for respondents No. 1-4/writ petitioners; and
Mr. S. Nepolean, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the authorities.
[3] Significantly, though the writ petition was filed challenging the order
issued by the Secretary of the School Managing Committee of Shakhi Devi Girl's
High School, Uripok, the said School Managing Committee was not even made a
party to the writ petition. Similarly, though the order dated 10.10.2016 issued by
the Zonal Education Officer/Zone-I, Government of Manipur, was also subjected to
challenge, the said Zonal Education Officer was not impleaded as a party
respondent in the writ petition. Needless to state, when a particular order is
subjected to challenge by an aggrieved party, it is incumbent upon such party to
implead the authority or designated officer who has issued such order, as it is that
authority or designated officer who would be in a position to properly defend or
justify the same.
W.A. No. 55 of 2022; & Ors. Page 3
[4] Mr. Th. Henba, learned counsel, would however point out that the
Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur, a superior authority in the State
hierarchy, was made a party and contend that there was no fatal defect in the writ
petition, as framed and filed.
[5] However, even if it is accepted that in so far as the Zonal Education
Officer/Zone-I, Government of Manipur, is concerned, the impleadment of his
superior officer would suffice, there is no excuse for not impleading the School
Managing Committee which issued the promotion order, which was the actual
source for grievance. The Zonal Education Officer/ Zone-I, Government of Manipur,
merely approved the same. It was therefore for the School Managing Committee
to defend and justify its action in promoting respondents No. 7, 8, 9 & 10 in the
writ petition as temporary teachers. The School Managing Committee was therefore
a 'necessary' party and not just a 'proper' party, as contended by Mr. Th. Henba,
learned counsel. In the absence of the said Committee, the writ petition suffered
from non-joinder of a 'necessary' party and was, therefore, fatally defective.
[6] Though respondent No. 10 filed an affidavit-in-opposition in the writ
petition on behalf respondents No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & himself, raising the issue of
the writ petition being bad for non-joinder of proper and necessary parties, the
learned Judge failed to take note of the same and did not deal with that issue at
all. However, as this defect in the framing and filing of the writ petition goes to the
very root of the matter, the adjudication by the learned Judge, in the absence of
an essential party, resulting in the setting aside of the impugned orders, cannot be
sustained.
W.A. No. 55 of 2022; & Ors. Page 4
The writ appeal is accordingly allowed, setting aside the judgment and
order dated 08.02.2022 passed in W.P. (C) No. 822 of 2017. Consequential
proceedings issued pursuant to and in implementation of the said order shall also
stand nullified.
In the light of this final order, no further orders are required to be
passed in the miscellaneous cases filed for interim relief.
MC (W.A.) No. 107 of 2022 and MC (W.A.) No. 108 of 2022 are
accordingly closed.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
W.A. No. 55 of 2022; & Ors. Page 5
