Sharma 11:27:23 +05'30' Md. Abdul ... vs The State Of Manipur Represented ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 194 Mani

                                                                                         Page |1
SHAMUR Digitally signed
        by
AILATPA SHAMURAILATP               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
        AM SUSHIL
M       SHARMA
                                               AT IMPHAL

SUSHIL Date:
        2022.05.11                        WP(C) No. 524 of 2021
SHARMA 11:27:23 +05'30' Md. Abdul Helim Khan, aged about 68 years, S/o. (L) Amir
                         Ali of Kshetri Bengoon Mayai Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat,
                         Imphal East District, Manipur.

                                                                                   ...Petitioner
                                              -Versus-

                         1. The State of Manipur represented by the Principal
                             Secretary/Commissioner/Secretary, (Hr. & Tech. Edn.),
                             Government of Manipur, Office at Secretariat, Babupara,
                             P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal West, Manipur-795001.

                         2. The Director of Higher and Technical Education,
                             Government of Manipur, office at Neitaipat Chuthek, opp.
                             MSPDCL/MSPCL Building, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, Imphal
                             West, Manipur- 795001.

                                                                         .... RESPONDENTS.

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

For the Petitioner :: Mr. M. Hemchandra, Sr. Advocate

For the Respondents :: Y. Ashang, GA

Date of Hearing and reserving Judgment & Order :: 27.04.2022

Date of Judgment & Order :: 10.05.2022

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |2

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to

quash the impugned order dated 15.7.2921 issued by the

Commissioner, Higher and Technical Education, Government of

Manipur and to direct the respondents to release the entitled

payment of arrear with effect from 27.12.2007 i.e. the date of

completion of two refresher course till retirement i.e. 1.2.2017

without any undue delay.

2. Brief facts, which led to the filing of the writ petition,

are as follows:

The petitioner was selected and posted as adhoc

Lecturer in English at Y.K. College, Wangjing and he was placed

in the senior scale of pay with effect from 24.8.1989. During the

year 2008, the Principal of Lamka College, Churachandpur

submitted a self-appraisal report along with documents for

placement at higher grade in respect of two senior Lecturers,

including the petitioner. It is averred that on 31.3.2010, the

Additional Director (University and Higher Education) wrote a

letter to the Commissioner (Higher Education), Government of

Manipur whereby the performance appraisal and ACR for the

year 1989-90 to 1993-94 along with certificates for attending two

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |3

refresher courses in respect of the petitioner for placing in higher

grade (Lecturer Selection Grade) for onward submission to the

Manipur Public Service Commission (MPSC).

2.1. In supersession of the Government Order dated

3.6.2011 and also in consideration of the recommendation of the

Government of India, the Commissioner (Higher Education)

issued an order dated 12.8.2011 according sanction to the

revision of scales of pay of different categories of the College

Teachers. In the said order, the post of Lecturer

(SG)/Reader/College Librarian (SG)/Physical Education Lecturer

(SG) in the pay band of Rs.1200-420-18300 in the existing scale

of pay under ROP 1999 has been re-designated as Associate

Professor/College Librarian (SG)/College DPE (SC) on

completion of 3 years in the AGP of Rs.8000 and fulfilling the

other UGC conditions with revised pay band in PB-4: Rs.37400-

67000+AGP 9000/-.

2.2. The petitioner is very much qualified and entitled to

be promoted to the post of Lecturer (SG) now re-designated as

Associate Professor, but has been arbitrarily placed in the lower

post of Lecturer (SS) now re-designated as Assistant Professor

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |4

in the pay band of PB-3: Rs.15600-39100+GP 7000/-, which was

evident from the pay slip dated 17.6.2016.

2.3. On 21.2.2017, the Deputy Secretary (Higher and

Technical Education) issued an order whereby the petitioner

along with nine others retired from service upon attaining the age

of superannuation on 28.2.2017 wherein the post of the petitioner

has been shown as Associate professor and all these while, he

was made to serve as Assistant Professor in the lower pay band

while the pay scale of Associate Professor is much higher than

what the petitioner was receiving. The petitioner is very much

entitled for higher scale of pay of Rs.37400-67000+AGP 9000/-

in the pay band of Associate Professor way back from 24.8.1997.

2.4. The application of the petitioner to issue last pay

certificate was forwarded by the Principal, Modern College,

Imphal to the Treasury Officer, Imphal East on 6.4.2017. The

Senior Accounts Officer of the office of the Accountant General

in his letter dated 31.7.2017 addressed to the Principal, Modern

College, the designation of the petitioner has been stated as

Associate Professor (Retd.).

2.5. On 29.1.2018, the petitioner submitted a

representation seeking to expedite the entire process for

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |5

payment of the entire back wages, arrear and pensionary

benefits for the post of Associate Professor, as he is entitled to

receive pensionary benefits as well as other monetary benefits

for the post of Associate Professor without any further delay.

Since the respondents failed to process the retiral/pensionary

benefits, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.141 of 2018 before this

Court and by the order dated 20.02.2018, the said writ petition

was disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the

representation of the petitioner. Since the respondents failed to

comply with the direction of this Court, the petitioner has filed

Contempt Case (C) No.91 of 2018 and during pendency of the

contempt case, the Commissioner (HR. & Tech. Edn.) passed an

order dated 25.9.2018 according sanction to the

promotion/placement of the petitioner in the Lecturer (SG) in the

pay scale of Rs.3700/- to Rs.5700/- notionally with effect from

24.8.1997 and cash payment from 17.2.2014 ie. the date of

completion of refresher course.

2.6. On 22.11.2018, the Commissioner (Hr. & Tech.

Edn.) passed an order according sanction to the re-designation

of the petitioner, who is a retired Lecturer (SG) as Associate

Professor in the PB-4: Rs.37400 to Rs.67000/- plus AGP

Rs.9000/- notionally with effect from 1.1.2006 with cash payment

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |6

from 17.2.2014 i.e. date of completion of refresher course. On

13.12.2018, the Commissioner passed another order stating that

the Administrative Department of Higher and Technical

Education issued an order dated 22.11.2018 with regard to re-

designation of the petitioner as Associate Professor in the pay

band of Rs.37400/- notionally with effect from 1.1.2006 with cash

payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. the date of completion of refresher

course.

2.7. According to the petitioner the orders dated

25.9.2018, 22.11.2018 and 13.12.2018 are not in compliance

with the order dated 20.2.2018 of this Court and also contrary to

the facts stated in the representation dated 29.1.2018. Though

the date of retirement of the petitioner is 28.2.2017, in the

aforesaid orders, the date of retirement has been wrongly

mentioned as 28.1.2018.

2.8. Since the petitioner facing great financial hardship

for his own survival and family members, he made a

representation dated 28.12.2018 to the respondents 1 and 2

praying for payment of retiral/pensionary benefits. The petitioner

also filed W.P.(C) No.3 of 2019 before this Court praying inter

alia to execute and implement paragraph 6 of the order dated

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |7

13.12.2018. On 5.2.2019, the said writ petition was disposed of

by directing the respondents to sort out the matter and to pay the

retiral benefits, arrears and pension to him within a period of

three months, failing which pay penal interest at the rate of 4%

per annum.

2.9. Pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2018 and the

direction of this Court in W.P.(C) No.141 of 2018, the petitioner

has given retiral/pensionary benefits by the authority after re-

designating him as Associate Professor in the PB-4: Rs.37400 to

Rs.67000/- plus AGP of Rs.9000/- notionally with effect from

1.1.2006 with cash payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. date of

completion of refresher course. The petitioner was compelled to

take the said retiral/pensionary benefits on protest in view of the

financial hardship faced by him. The petitioner has completed

four refresher course and the same was also recorded in the

letter of the MPSC dated 24.5.2018.

2.10. Aggrieved by the orders dated 25.9.2018,

22.11.2018 and 13.12.2018 more specifically in respect of cash

payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. the date of alleged completion of

refresher course, the petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020

before this Court to quash the same and to direct the

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |8

respondents to release the entitled payment of retiral/pensionary

benefits with effect from 27.12.2007 i.e. the date of completion of

2 refresher courses as per the UGC Regulations, 2000 without

any undue delay. By the order dated 13.1.2021, the said writ

petition was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make

a fresh representation within a period of one week from the date

of the order, whereafter the respondents to forthwith consider the

representation and correct the anomaly, if any, that may have

occurred and pass orders at the earliest, but not later than two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

2.11. Pursuant to the direction of this Court dated

13.1.2021, the petitioner submitted a representation on

18.1.2021 requesting to release the entitled payment of arrears

with effect from 27.12.2007. Since the respondent authorities

failed to comply with the direction passed in W.P.(C) No.277 of

2020, the petitioner has filed Contempt Case (C) No.37 of 2021.

While so, to the utter shock and surprise, the Commissioner has

passed the impugned order dated 15.7.2021 rejecting the

representation of the petitioner dated 18.1.2021. Challenging the

same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 Page |9

3. Resisting the writ petition, the respondents 1 and 2

filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that the petitioner was never

placed in senior scale in the year 1989 as per the UGC

guidelines. Every Lecturer will be placed in a senior scale of

Rs.3000-5000/-, if he/she has completed 8 years of service after

regular appointment with relaxation; participated in two refresher

course/summer institutes, each of approximately four weeks

duration or engaged in other appropriate continuing education

programmes of comparable quality as may be specified by UGC;

consistent satisfactory performance appraisal reports.

3.1. It is stated that the petitioner had participated in two

refresher course during 30.03.2017 to 19.04.2007 and 7.12.2007

to 27.12.2007 i.e. he has fulfilled for placing senior scale as per

the UGC guidelines, 1998. The petitioner was placed in selection

grade scale in the year 1994 on the recommendation of the

MPSC under UGC guidelines, 2000. As per the said guidelines,

every Lecturer will be placed in a senior scale of Rs.3000-5000/,

if he/she has completed 5 years of service senior scale; after

placement in senior scale participated in two refresher

course/summer institutes of approved duration of engaged in

other appropriate continuing education programmes of

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 10

comparable quality as may be specified by UGC and consistent

satisfactory performance appraisal reports.

3.2. It is stated that the petitioner has participated in two

refresher courses during 13.6.2011 to 2.7.2011 and 27.1.2014 to

17.2.2014 i.e. he has fulfilled for placing selection grade scale as

per UGC guidelines, 2000. Hence, there is no question of

miscarriage of justice and irreparable injury in the present case

and also there is no illegality in the order dated 15.7.2021 and

thus prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

4. Assailing the impugned order, Mr. Hemchandra, the

learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

impugned order dated 15.7.2021 was issued by ignoring the real

factual background of the case, deliberately, purported to be in

compliance of the order of this Court dated 13.1.2021 in W.P.(C)

No.277 of 2020. In fact, the representation of the petitioner dated

18.1.2021 was abruptly rejected and disposed of by the

Commissioner without any substantial basis.

5. The learned senior counsel further submitted that

as per para 11 of the impugned order, the placement of Lecturer

(SS) and Lecturer (SG) are required to undertake four refresher

courses conducted by the UGC as per the UGC Guidelines 2000.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 11

The petitioner has already promoted to Lecturer in senior scale

on 24.10.1989 along with 61 other teachers. As per the

proceedings of the MPSC and UGC Regulations, the promotion

to selection grade required to complete five years of service after

senior scale and undergo two refresher courses. He would

submit that the petitioner has already completed four refresher

courses i.e. 1st refresher course dated 30.03.2007; 2nd refresher

course from 7.12.2007 to 27.12.2007; 3rd refresher course from

13.6.2011 to 2.7.2011 and 4th refresher course from 27.1.2014

to 17.2.2014. Thus, the cash payment allotted to the post of

selection grade is due from the date of completion of the second

refresher course i.e. 27.12.2007 till retirement.

6. The learned senior counsel urged that the petitioner

is eligible to be considered for grant of Lecturer (SG) and his case

was considered by the duly constituted screening committee and

the said committee had also found him suitable in all respects

and in fact, in the order dated 25.9.2018 itself, it has been clearly

mentioned that the petitioner is promoted to Lecturer (SG)

notionally with effect from 24.8.1997. The aforesaid fact clearly

prove that the petitioner is entitled to receive cash payment or

arrears with effect from 27.12.2007 i.e. the date of completion of

two refresher courses.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 12

7. Per contra, Mr. Y. Ashang, the learned Government

Advocate submitted that as per the UGC Guidelines 1988

(Career Advancement Scheme), every Lecturer will be placed in

a senior scale of Rs.3000-5000 if he/she has completed 8 years

of service after regular appointment with certain relaxation

provided therein; participation of two refresher courses each

approximately four weeks duration or engaged in other

appropriate continuing education programmes of comparable

quality and consistent satisfactory performance appraisal

reports. He would submit that in the case of petitioner, he had

participated two refresher courses during 30.3.2007 to 19.4.2007

and 7.12.2007 to 27.12.2007 i.e. he has fulfilled for placing in the

senior scale as per UGC Guidelines 1998.

8. The learned Government counsel further submitted

that the petitioner was placed in selection grade scale in the year

1994 on the recommendation of the MPSC under UGC

Guidelines 2000 (Career Advancement Scheme) and as per the

guidelines, every Lecturer will be placed in a senior scale of

Rs.3000-5000/- if he/she has completed five years of service at

senior scale; after placement in senior scale, participated in two

refresher course of approved duration engaged in other

appropriate continuing education programmes of comparable

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 13

quality and consistent satisfactory performance appraisal

reports. According to the learned Government counsel, the

petitioner had participated in two refresher courses during

13.6.2011 to 2.7.2011 and 27.1.2014 to 17.2.2014 that is the

petitioner has to fulfil the UGC Guidelines 2000 for placing him in

selection grade scale. Therefore, there is no question of

miscarriage of justice while issuing the impugned order and also

there is no illegality in it. Thus, prayed for dismissal of the writ

petition.

9. This Court considered the rival submissions raised

and also perused the materials available on record.

10. The petitioner was initially appointed as Lecturer

(English) on substitute basis. By an order dated 21.11.1986, the

petitioner along with others were regularised and the petitioner

was posted at Y.K. College, Wangjing. While the petitioner was

serving as Associate Professor at Modern College, he retired on

attaining the age of superannuation on 28.2.2017 and by an

order dated 21.2.2017, the petitioner was permitted to retire from

service.

11. The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to

the order of this Court dated 20.2.2018 passed in W.P.(C)

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 14

No.141 of 2018, while considering the case of the petitioner, the

Commissioner accorded sanction to the promotion/placement of

the petitioner in the Lecturer (SG) in the pay scale of Rs.3700-

5700/- notionally with effect from 24.8.1997 and cash payment

from 17.2.2014 i.e. the date of completion of refresher courses.

Similarly, while passing order dated 22.11.2018 accorded

sanction to the re-designation of the petitioner as Associate

Professor in the pay scale of PB-4: Rs.37400-67000+AGP

Rs.9000/- notionally with effect from 1.1.2006 with cash payment

from 17.2.2014 i.e. the date of alleged completion of refresher

course. Again while passing the order dated 13.12.2018, it has

been stated that the cash payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. the date

of alleged completion of refresher course.

12. According to the petitioner, he has completed four

UGC Sponsored Refresher Courses, namely (i) UGC Sponsored

Refresher Course in English w.e.f. 30.3.2007 to 19.4.2007; (ii)

UGC Sponsored Refresher Course in English w.e.f. 7.12.2007 to

27.12.2007; (iii) UGC Sponsored Refresher Course in English -

Literature in the Global Context w.e.f. 13.6.2011 to 2.7.2011 and

(iv) UGC Sponsored Refresher Course in English w.e.f.

27.1.2014 t 17.2.2014.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 15

13. On the other hand, it is the plea of the respondents

that the petitioner participated in two refresher courses during

1.6.2011 to 2.7.2011 and 27.1.2014 to 17.2.2014 for placing

selection grade scale as per the UGC Guidelines, 2000. Hence,

there is no illegality in issuing the impugned order.

14. In view of the aforesaid submissions raised by the

parties, let us consider the matter in the light of the previous

litigations initiated by the petitioner.

15. As could be seen from the pleadings, when the

respondent authorities failed to expedite the process for

granting/payment of the entitled back wages, arrears and

pensionary benefits for the post of Associate Professor to the

petitioner, he has submitted a representation on 29.1.2018 to the

respondent authorities. Since the respondents authorities failed

to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.1.2018,

he has filed W.P.(C) No.141 of 2018 before this Court. After

hearing both sides, by the order dated 20.2.2018, this Court

disposed of the writ petition by passing the following order:

"Heard Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Athouba, learned G.A. for the State.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 16

It has been submitted by Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner will be satisfied for the time being if a direction is given to the respondents authorities to consider the representation submitted by him on 29.01.2018 for release of his pensionary benefits. The petitioner has retired from service while serving as an Associate Professor in the Modern College, Imphal vide order dated 21.02.2017 having attained the age of superannuation on 28.02.2017. However, he has not got any pensionary benefits. He requested to the authorities concerned and accordingly, office of the Principal, Modern College, Imphal wrote to the Treasury Officer to issue the Last Pay Certificate for processing pensionary benefits vide letter 06.04.2017. However, there is no any response from the said concerned authority, because of which, the petitioner has not got any retiral benefits.

In view of the above submission, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the said representation of the petitioner dated 29.01.2018 as a person on retirement is entitled to the pensionary benefits which shall not be unduly delayed. The said representation may be considered and disposed as mentioned above by issuing a speaking order within a period of 2 (two) months. While considering the representation, the letter dated 16.09.2008 issued by the Principal, Lamka

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 17

College, Churachandpur may also be taken into consideration.

Writ petition stands disposed of with the above observation and direction."

16. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 20.2.2018, the Commissioner (Hr. & Tech. Edn.) passed an order dated 25.9.2018. The order dated 25.9.2018 reads thus:

"Writ/11/12/2018-HE/Case. In pursuance of the University Grant's Commission (UGC), New Delhi Guidelines for Career Advancement Scheme circulated by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development vide Notification No. F1-21/87- U1 dated 22/07/1998 read with Government of Manipur, Finance Department PIC's order No.3/9/86-FIC(P1) dated 03/10/1998 and also on the recommendation of the Selection Committee associated with Manipur Public Service Commission, Imphal conveyed vide their letter No. 8-A/35/2018-MPSC(P) dated 10-08-2018; the Governor of Manipuri is pleased to accord sanction to the promotion/placement of Md. Abdul Helim Khan, Retd. Assistant Professor in Mathematics at Modern College, Imphal in the Lecturer (SG) borne on the pay scale of Rs.3700 - 5700/- notionally w.e.f. 24-08-1997 and cash payment from 17-02-2014 i.e. date of Completion of refresher Course.

The Governor is further pleased to order that the above placement of the College lecturer shall not be construed

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 18

either as conveying any authority for inter-se seniority of Lecturers and this recommendation shall not be cited in support of any claim for seniority as his placement in different grade/ scale is not based on seniority and is a continuing process.

This issues in compliance of the Hon'ble High of Manipur order dated 25-10-2017 passed in W.P.(C) No 141/2018 (Md. Abdul Helim Khan -Vs- The State of Manipur & Ors) with the concurrence of Finance Department (PIC), Government of Manipur vide their U.O.No.162/2018-2019/FD(PIC) dated 10/09/2018."

17. In continuation of the order dated 25.9.2018, on

22.11.2018, the Commissioner has passed the following

order:

"Writ/11/12/2018-HE/Case, In continuation of this Government Department of Higher & Technical Education, Manipur Order No.1/51/89-5/SE dated 23"

May 1989 and its subsequent Order No. Writ/11/12/2018-HE/Case dated 25th September, 2018 regarding promotion/placement of Lecturer, Senior Scale (Pre-revised scale) to Lecturer, Selection Grade (Pre-

revised scale), the Governor of Manipur is pleased to accord sanction to the re-designation of Md. Abdul Helim Khan, Ret Lecturer (Selection Grade) as Associate Professor in the PB4. Rs.37,400/- to Rs.67,000/- + AGP of Rs.9000/- notionally with effect from 01-01-2006 with

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 19

cash payment from 17-02-2014 i.e. date of completion of Refresher Course.

This issues in compliance of the Hon'ble High Court of Manipur order dated 25-10-2017 passed in WP (C) No 141/2018 (Md. Abdul Helim Khan -Vs- The State of Map & Ors) with the concurrence of Finance Department (PIC), Government of Manipur vide their UO.No.217/2018-2019/FD(PIC) dated 14/11/2018."

18. Subsequent to the passing of the order dated

22.11.2018, the Commissioner has passed the following order on

13.12.2018:

"No Writ/11/12/2018-HE/Case. Whereas, Md Abdul Helim Khan who was terminated vide Order No.7(2)/12/2000- S/HE(Pt-1) dated 21.2.2018 submitted a representation dated 29.1.2018 to the authority thereby seeking for granting/releasing pensionary benefit and other monetary benefit including arrear etc. for the post of Associate Professor without any undue delay, as the applicant have retired from service as Associate Professor on 28.1.2018 on attaining the age of superannuation.

2. And whereas, the applicant filed a writ petition being WP (C) No.141 of 2018 thereby praying inter alia to consider the representation dated 29.1.2018 for release of pensionary benefit submitted to the authority.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 20

3. And whereas, the Hon'ble High Court Manipur was pleased to dispose of the writ petition on 20.02.2018 with a direction to the respondents authorities in the following manner:

" .... to consider the said representation of the petitioner dated 29.1.2018 as a person on retirement is entitled to the pensionary benefits which shall not be unduly delay. The said representation may be considered and disposed as mentioned above by issuing a speaking order within a period of 2 (two) months. While considering the representation, the letter dated 16.9.2008 issued by the Principal, Lamka College, Churachandpur may also be taken into consideration"

4. And whereas the writ petitioner in the above referred writ petition being W.P.(C) No 141 of 2018 filed a Contempt case being Cont. Case (C) No 91 of 2018 for compliance of the Hon'ble Court's Order dated 20.02.2018 passed in the above referred writ petition.

5. And whereas the Administrative Department of Higher & Technical Education issued an Order being No writ/11/12/2018-HE/Case dated 25.9.2018 with regards to promotion/placement of the writ petitioner in the Lecturer (SG) borne on the pay scale of Rs.3700-5700 notionally w.e.f. 24.8.1997 and cash payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. date of completion of refresher course.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 21

6. And whereas, the Administrative Department of Higher & Technical Education issued another Order being No writ/11/12/2018 HE/Case dated 22.11.2018 with regards to the re-designation of the writ petitioner as Associate Professor in the PB4 Rs.37,100 lo Rs 67000/- AGP of Rs.9000/- notionally w.e.f. 24.8.1997 and cash payment from 17.2.2014 i.e. date of completion of refresher course.

7. And whereas the release of pensionary benefit it is necessary for the petitioner to submit the relevant documents through the appropriate authorities without which it is not possible to process for payment of pension and whereas on examination of the records as on date it is understood that the petitioner has not yet completed the above required formalities.

8. Now, therefore, in compliance of Hon'ble High Count's Orders/ directives given on 20.02.2018 to the State Government Respondents in WF (C) No 141 of 2018 (Md. Abdul Halim Khan-vs- The State of Manipur & Ors) and as per the steps/measures that had already been taken up Administrative Department, the Governor of Manipur is pleased to order that at the present stage the Department has already complied with the Hon'ble Court's Order by issuing necessary orders dated 22.11.2018 mentioned in the paragraph 6 above. As such, the matter referred to above stands disposed of accordingly.

This issues in compliance of Hon'ble Court's Order dated 20.02.2018 passed in WP (C) No 141 of 2018 (Md Abdul Halim Kluan-vs- The State of Manipur & Ors)."

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 22

19. In all the aforesaid three orders, the Commissioner

has stated that the re-designation of the petitioner as Associate

Professor in the PB-4: Rs.37400 to Rs.67,000 + AGP of

Rs.9000/- notionally with effect from 1.1.2006 with cash payment

from 17.2.2014 i.e. date of completion of refresher courses.

20. As stated supra, aggrieved by the order dated

13.12.2018, more particularly, paragraph 6, the petitioner has

submitted a detailed representation on 28.12.2018 praying to

release his pensionary benefits, entitled monetary benefits,

retirement benefits, including arrears etc. for the post of

Associate Professor. Since the said representation of the

petitioner has not considered by the respondent authorities, the

petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No.3 of 2019. By the order dated

5.2.2019, this Court disposed of the said writ petition by directing

the respondent authorities to sort out the matter and pay the

retiral benefits, arrears and pension to the petitioner within a

period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the

order so that the payment of retiral benefits, arrears and pensions

is not unduly delayed. Paragraphs 9 to 13 are relevant and the

same are extracted hereunder:

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 23

"[9] The petitioner was made to retire on attaining the age of superannuation by the order dated 21-2-2017 w.e.f., 28- 2- 2017.

[10] The petitioner has claimed before the concerned authority for issuance of his last pay certificate and that has also not been done. There is no indication that the petitioner is responsible for not being issued with his last pay certificate. However, these are issues which have to be settled by the authorities for which, the petitioner is also expected to render all cooperation in submitting the necessary documents for finalization of the retiral benefits, arrears and pensions. As the petitioner has retired as early as 28-2- 2017, this Court is taking a serious view of the matter inasmuch as the petitioner has been put in a state of penury without being paid his retiral benefits, arrears and pensions.

[11] In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to sort out the matter and pay the retiral benefits, arrears and pensions to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this Court's order so that payment of retiral benefits, arrears and pensions is not unduly delayed.

[12] It is also made clear that if the retiral benefits, arrears and pensions are not paid to the petitioner within the stipulated period of three months, there shall be a penal interest of 4% to be paid and such penal interest shall be

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 24

paid from the accounts of those responsible for the delay and not from the State account.

[13] The State Government shall ensure that all the relevant documents relating for payment of retiral benefits, arrears and pensions to the petitioner shall be submitted to the Office of the Accountant General (A&E) within a period of six weeks.

With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of."

21. Pursuant to the order of this Court passed in the

previous writ petitions and the impugned order dated 13.12.2018,

the petitioner was given retiral/pensionary benefits after re-

designating him as Associate Professor in the PB-4: Rs.37400-

67000+AGP 9000/- notionally with effect from 1.1.2016 with cash

payment from 17.2.2014, the date of completion of refresher

course. Since the petitioner was facing financial hardship, he was

forced to take the said retiral benefits on protest.

22. On a perusal of the proceedings of the Selection

Committee meeting held on 21.5.2018 in connection with the

placement of Lecturer (SS) in English of Government Colleges in

Selection Grade in the Department of Higher & Technical

Education and the letter dated 24.5.2018, it has been mentioned

that the petitioner has completed four UGC Sponsored Refresher

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 25

Courses and the date of regular appointment as Lecturer (SS) on

24.8.1989.

23. At this juncture, by placing reliance upon the UGC

Regulations, 2000, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner

argued that the petitioner being a Lecturer in Senior Scale is

eligible for placement in Selection Grade, as he has completed 5

years of service after Senior Scale and after placement in the

Senior Scale, participated two UGC Sponsored Refresher

Course. In paragraph 7 of the proceedings dated 24.5.2018, it

has been clearly stated that the petitioner had participated four

refresher courses and the course duration has been stated as

under:

               i        (i) 30/03/07 to 19/04/07

               ii       (ii) 07/12/07 to 27/12/07

               iii      (iii) 13/06/11 to 02/07/11

               iv       (iv) 27/01/14 to 17/02/14

From the aforesaid dates, it is clear that the

petitioner has participated his second refresher course from

07.12.2007 to 27.12.2007 and in fact he has completed the

second refresher course on 27.12.2007. However, in all three

earlier proceedings dated 25.9.2018, 22.11.2018 and

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 26

13.12.2018, the date of completion of second refresher course

has been mentioned as 17.02.2014, which according to the

petitioner is incorrect.

24. Challenging the aforesaid three orders, particularly,

in respect of cash payment from 17.02.2014 and direction on the

respondents to modify/rectify the said portion in the order and

also to direct the respondents to release the entitled payment of

retiral/pensionary benefits with effect from 27.02.2007 i.e. the

date of completion of the second refresher course, the petitioner

has filed W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020 before this Court.

25. As stated supra, by the order dated 13.1.2021,

W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020 came to be disposed of with a direction

to the petitioner to make a detail representation by annexing all

required documents within a period of one week and thereafter,

the concerned authorities shall forthwith look into the matter and

consider the representation of the petitioner and correct the

anomaly, if any, that may have occurred. The operative portion

of the order in the said writ petition reads thus:

"After taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned G.A., this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make a detail representation by annexing all required documents

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 27

within a period of one week from today. Thereafter, the concerned authorities shall forthwith look into the matter and consider the representation of the petitioner and correct the anomaly, if any, that may have occurred and pass necessary orders at the earliest but not later than two months from the date of receipt of the representation to be made by the petitioner. With the above observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of."

26. Pursuant to the direction of this Court dated

13.1.2021, the petitioner has submitted a representation on

18.1.2021 praying to release the entitled payment of arrear with

effect from 27.12.2007. Since the respondent authorities failed to

comply with the order dated 13.1.2021, the petitioner filed

Contempt Case (C) No.37 of 2021. Pending Contempt case, the

Commissioner (Hr. & Tech. Edn.) has issued the impugned order

dated 15.7.2021.

27. As stated supra, as per the UGC Regulations, 2000,

a Lecturer in Senior Grade will be eligible for

promotion/placement in Selection Grade through a procedure of

selection, if he/she has:

(a) completed 5 (five) years of service after Senior Scale.

(b) after placement in the Senior Scale, participated in two

refresher courses/ summer institutes of approved

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 28

during or engaged in other appropriate continuing

education programmes of comparable quality as may

be specified or approved by the UGC.

(c) consistently satisfactory performance appraisal

reports.

(d) a good record in teaching and, preferably, have

contributed in various ways such as to the corporate

life of the institution, examination work, or through

extension.

28. As is evident from the pleadings and the materials

produced by both sides, the petitioner has already completed 5

years of service after Senior Scale and that after being placed in

the Senior Scale, he has already participated in two refresher

courses and certificates to that effect were also produced by him

along with the writ petition. However, ignoring the aforesaid

factual aspect, the respondent authorities granted the petitioner

placement in the Lecturer (SG) in the pay scale of Rs.3700-5700

notionally with effect from 24.8.1997 and cash payment from

17.2.2014. As stated supra, when the petitioner has completed

his second refresher course on 27.12.2007, it is the bounden

duty of the respondent authorities to give him cash payment with

effect from 27.12.2007 and not 17.02.2014, as 17.02.2014 is the

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 29

date for completion of the fourth refresher course. As rightly

argued by learned senior counsel for the petitioner, the

respondent authorities could have committed mistake due to the

submission of the four refresher course certificates.

29. In fact, while disposing of W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020,

this Court, after recording the submissions of the learned

Government Advocate, directed the petitioner to submit a

representation and upon receipt of the representation, the

respondent authorities to forthwith look into the matter and

consider the representation of the petitioner and correct the

anomaly, if any, that may have occurred and pass necessary

orders at the earliest. Thus, it is clear that the direction of this

Court is to the effect that the respondent should correct the

anomaly at the earliest.

30. While that being so, the Commissioner has passed

the impugned order on 15.7.2021 with a delay of nearly six

months. While issuing the impugned order, in paragraphs 11 and

12, it has been stated as under:

"11. and whereas, as per UGC Guideline, 2000, if a College Lecturer/Assistant Professor need to replacement in Higher Scale i.e. Lecturer (Sr. Scale) and Lecturer (SG) there are required to undertake 4 (four) course training

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 30

programme (Refresher course) conducted/sponsored by UGC i.e. 2 (Refresher Course) for placement to Lecturer (Sr. Scale and 2 (Refresher Courses) for placement to Lecturer (Selection Grade). As such, in the present case also Md.Abdul Hakim is required to undertake required 4 (four) Refresher Courses.

12. Now, therefore, in the light of the above facts and circumstances, the Administrative Department (Hr. & Tech. Edn.) Government of Manipur having minutely examined the said Representation and considered the representation dated 18.01.2021 submitted by the Writ Petitioner, the said Representation is rejected as no anomaly is found to have occurred in the Government orders."

32. At this juncture, it is pertinent to point out that during

the course of arguments in W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020, the learned

Government Advocate submitted that there appears to have

been some anomaly while considering the case of the petitioner,

inasmuch as he has completed 4 (four) refresher courses and

submitted those 4 (four) certificates. The learned Government

Advocate also submitted that the respondents would reconsider

the case of the petitioner provided that he makes an application.

33. When the respondents themselves through the Government

Advocate state that there appears to have been some anomaly

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 31

while considering the case of the petitioner, they ought not to

have passed the impugned order dated 15.7.2021 rejecting the

representation of the petitioner. That apart, as stated supra, this

Court has issued a positive direction on the respondents to

forthwith look into the matter and consider the representation of

the petitioner and correct the anomaly. As against the order

dated 13.1.2021, the respondent authorities have not filed any

appeal and they allowed the said order to attain finality.

34. Once the respondent authorities found that there is

an anomaly in the case of the petitioner, by simply rejecting the

claim of the petitioner is not the way and they should consider

the claim positively and extend the benefits sought by the

petitioner pursuant to the direction of the Court. On the other

hand, in order to escape from the clutches of contempt

proceedings, the Commissioner has hurriedly passed the

impugned order dated 15.7.2021. The said approach adopted by

the Commissioner (Hr. & Tech. Edn.), Government of Manipur is

not sustainable in the eye law. The counter-affidavit filed by the

respondents 1 and 2 is also bereft of material particulars.

35. At this juncture, the learned senior counsel for the

petitioner submitted that reconsideration of a judgment of this

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 32

Court which has attained finality is not normally permissible and

a decision upon a question of law rendered by the Court was

conclusive and would bind the Court in subsequent cases. This

Court finds some force in the said submission made by learned

senior counsel for the petitioner.

36. In Union of India and others v. Major S.P.Sharma

and others, (2014) 6 SCC 351, the Apex Court held:

"82. In a country governed by the rule of law, the finality of a judgment is absolutely imperative and great sanctity is attached to the finality of the judgment and it is not permissible for the parties to reopen the concluded judgments of the court as it would not only tantamount to merely an abuse of the process of the court but would have far-reaching adverse effect on the administration of justice. It would also nullify the doctrine of stare decisis, a well-established valuable principle of precedent which cannot be departed from unless there are compelling circumstances to do so. The judgments of the court and particularly of the Apex Court of a country cannot and should not be unsettled lightly.

83. Precedent keeps the law predictable and the law declared by this Court, being the law of the land, is binding on all courts/tribunals and authorities in India in view of Article 141 of the Constitution. The judicial system "only works if someone is allowed to have the last word" and the

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 33

last word so spoken is accepted and religiously followed. The doctrine of stare decisis promotes a certainty and consistency in judicial decisions and this helps in the development of the law. Besides providing guidelines for individuals as to what would be the consequences if he chooses the legal action, the doctrine promotes confidence of the people in the system of the judicial administration. Even otherwise it is an imperative necessity to avoid uncertainty and confusion. Judicial propriety and decorum demand that the law laid down by the highest court of the land must be given effect to."

37. As stated supra, the respondent allowed the

decision in W.P.(C) No.277 of 2020 passed by this Court to attain

finality wherein this Court directed the respondent authorities to

correct the anomaly in the case of the petitioner forthwith.

Therefore, by violating the direction of this Court aforesaid, the

respondent authorities, now cannot contend that there is no

illegality in the impugned order. This Court is of the considered

opinion that the impugned order dated 15.7.2021 has been

passed hurriedly and also without applying the mind and that too

in an arbitrary manner. While passing the impugned order, the

Commissioner also ignored the real factual background of the

case.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 34

38. It is reiterated that the case of the petitioner was

earlier considered by a duly constituted screening committee,

which had found the petitioner suitable in all respects and

therefore, the petitioner is very much entitled to receive the cash

payment or arrears with effect from 27.02.2007 till retirement and

not 17.02.2014 as alleged by the respondents.

39. For the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the view of the

petitioner has made out a case and thus the impugned order

dated 15.7.2021 has been issued arbitrarily by the Commissioner

(Hr. & Tech. Edn.) and therefore, the same is liable to be set

aside.

40.      In the result,

         (i)    The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned order bearing No.Writ/11/7 /201-

HE/Case Imphal, dated 15.7.2021 passed by the

Commissioner (Hr. & Tech. Edn.), Government of

Manipur is set aside.

(iii) The respondents are directed to release the entitled

payment of arrears with effect from 27.12.2007 i.e.

the date of completion of the second refresher course

till retirement on 28.2.2017.

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021 P a g e | 35

(iv) The said exercise is directed to be completed within

a period of three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order.

(v) No costs.

JUDGE

FR/NFR

Sushil

WP(C) No. 524 of 2021