Manipur High Court
Thounaojam Chaoba Leima vs State Of Manipur & 3 Ors on 28 August, 2024
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item No. 5-6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 600 of 2024 with
MC(WP(C) No. 502 of 2024
Thounaojam Chaoba Leima
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
State of Manipur & 3 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Order
28.08.2024
[1] Heard Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned senior counsel
assisted by Ms. Julekha, learned counsel for the petitioner.
[2] Issue notice.
[3] Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G.A. accepts notice on behalf
of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Hence, service is complete on all the
respondents.
[4] Petitioner is directed to take step with respect to
respondent No. 4 by all available means and submit proof of affidavit of
service.
[5] Learned G.A. prays for 3 (three) weeks' time for filing
counter affidavit.
[6] Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, prays for stay of the impugned letter dated 20.08.2024
Page 1
written by the Joint Secretary (Health & FW), Government of Manipur
to the Director of Health Services, Manipur regarding re-engagement of
the private respondent No. 4 as Principal, School of ANM/FHW for the
period of one year from the date of signing contract or till the post is fill
up as per relevant rules.
[7] It is stated that as per the final seniority list issued on
30.11.2021 and after the retirement of the private respondent No. 4
w.e.f. 29.02.2024, the petitioner is the senior most in the cadre of
Public Health Nurse Instructor/Sister Instructor in the Directorate of
Health Services, Manipur after the retirement of private respondent No.
4.
[8] Vide order dated 01.07.2024, the petitioner has been
conferred with in-charge Principal, School of ANM/FHW in the
Directorate of Health Services, Manipur for extra remuneration as a
stop gap arrangement in addition to her normal duties and by the
impugned letter by superseding the in-charge appointment of the
petitioner, the private respondent No. 4 has been engaged on contract
basis as Principal of the institute to which the petitioner is holding the
post of Principal on in-charge basis.
[9] Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, draws the attention of this Court to the provisions of FR
56(d) which especially prescribes engagement of a Government
Employee after retirement in any form. He further refers to a judgment
dated 22.01.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 638 of 2020 in
which engagement of Director of Medical & Health Services, Manipur
Page 2
on contract basis was set aside by this Court as the same is in violation
of the provisions of FR 56(d) as well as the State Government policy of
not engaging any person after retirement. The judgment and order
dated 22.01.2021 passed by the Ld. Single Judge of this Court by
challenging in WA Nos. 4 of 2021 & 5 of 2021, the same was dismissed
as withdrawn vide order dated 24.02.2021.
[10] Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, submits that with the withdrawal of the writ appeals on
24.02.2021, the decision of the Ld. Single Judge holding that a person
cannot be re-engaged after retirement has attained finality. It is prayed
that the impugned letter be stayed during the pendency of the writ
petition as the same is in violation of the statutory provisions and the
earlier decision of this Court.
[11] Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G.A. for the State respondent,
submits that vide order dated 01.07.2024, the petitioner was conferred
with in-charge Principal of the institute until further order and by the
impugned letter dated 20.08.2024, the private respondent No. 4 was
re-engaged on contract basis after retirement. It is not the case of
present in-charge by any other in-charge rather the private respondent
No. 4 was engaged on contract basis for one year till the process of
regular appointment and as such, the petitioner has no inherent right to
hold in-charge appointment till regular appointment once Principal on
contract basis has been engaged by the State respondent.
[12] Learned G.A. submits that some time may be given to
take instruction in this regard.
Page 3
[13] This Court has considered the submissions made at the
bar, the materials on record and especially the earlier decision of this
Court.
[14] It is admitted fact that the private respondent No. 4 retired
as Principal, school of ANM/FHW, Manipur with effect from 29.02.2024
and after her retirement, the petitioner is the senior most in the feeder
cadre for promotion to the post of Principal. Accordingly, she has been
conferred with in-charge Principal of the institute. However, the
impugned letter dated 20.08.2024 re-engaging the private respondent
No. 4 on contract basis as Principal of the institute seems to be in
violation of the provisions of FR 56(d) as well as decision of this Court
as mentioned above.
[15] Accordingly, the impugned letter dated 20.08.2024
engaging the private respondent No. 4 as Principal on contract basis is
kept in suspension till the next date. The prayer for interim relief will be
considered on the next date.
[16] List this case on 07.10.2024.
[17] Furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the
parties in the course of the day.
JUDGE
KH. Digitally signed
by KH. JOSHUA Kh. Joshua Maring
JOSHUA MARING
Date: 2024.08.30
MARING 09:42:47 +05'30'
Page 4
