Manipur High Court
H. Thoiba Singh & 6 Ors vs State Of Manipur & 2 Ors on 25 October, 2024
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Suppl. Item No. 1-4 & 12-13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 768 of 2024 with
MC(WP(C) No. 665 of 2024 with
WP(C) No. 769 of 2024 with
MC(WP(C) No. 666 of 2024 with
WP(C) No. 765 of 2024 with
MC(WP(C) No. 663 of 2024
H. Thoiba Singh & 6 Ors.
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
State of Manipur & 2 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Order
25.10.2024
[1] Heard Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel assisted
by Mr. Syed Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner in
WP(C) Nos. 768 of 2024 & 765 of 2024 and Mr. M. Hemchandra,
learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Thomas, learned counsel for
the petitioner in WP(C) No. 769 of 2024.
[2] Issue notice.
[3] Ms. Sharmila, learned counsel assisting learned A.G.
accepts notice on behalf of the State respondent. Hence, service is
complete on all the respondents.
[4] Learned A.G. prays for 3 (three) weeks' time for filing
counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit, if any, before the next date with
an advance copy to the other side.
Page 1
[5] Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel for the
petitioners, submits that the impugned order dated 10.10.2024 issued
by the Under Secretary (Education/S), Government of Manipur has
cancelled the decision of the State Government to regularize 502 ad-
hoc teachers/graduate teachers on the allegation of irregularities
including non-production of attendance register of 502 ad-hoc teachers
to show that they were still continuing in service at the time of their
regularization. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has pointed out
that regularization of the petitioners and others numbering 230 was on
the basis of the direction of this Court in the order dated 22.11.2021
passed in WP(C) Nos. 73 of 2019 & 26 of 2018 and the judgment and
order dated 21.02.2023 in Cont.Cas(C) Nos. 160 of 2022, 131 of 2022,
137 of 2022, 170 of 2022, 171 of 2022, etc. It is also submitted that the
directions passed by the Ld. Single Judge in the batch of writ petitions
and in the contempt cases have attained finality and regularization of
the petitioners and others are in compliance of the direction of this
Court.
[6] It is submitted that cancelling the regularization of 502
teachers including the petitioners herein who have regularized by the
directions of this Court is, prima facie, illegal and cannot be resorted to
without modifying or setting aside the directions of this Court. It is also
submitted that the cancellation of the regularization orders is without
issuing any notice and without giving the names of any employees who
have regularized and it amounts to termination without any enquiry. It is
further submitted that the impugned order is prima facie illegal and is
Page 2
nothing but to circumvent the directions of this Court and prays that the
impugned order be suspended.
[7] On the other hand, Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned A.G.,
submits that at the time of regularization of adhoc appointment as per
the directions of this Court in a batch of writ petitions and contempt
petitions, the necessary documents such as attendance register of the
ad-hoc teachers were not produced and their service have been
regularized without examination of the particulars as mentioned in para
9 of the impugned order. It is the submission of the learned A.G. that
the direction of this Court in the order dated 22.11.2021 is a judgment
in personam confined to the petitioners in those writ petitions.
[8] Learned A.G. refers to the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court reported as (2008) 2 SCC 750 wherein it is stated that
the State Government has every power to rectify mistakes committed
earlier and the impugned order is in exercise of such sovereign
functions. It is submitted that the prayer for interim order may be
rejected and the State is contemplating filing review/appeal/any
appropriate application against the directions issued by this Court on
earlier occasions. Learned A.G. further submits that recently the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has set aside the appointment of 1423
teachers of Manipur on the basis of gross illegality in the appointment.
Learned A.G. draws the attention of this Court to the contents of para
10 to 14 of the impugned order dated 10.10.2024 wherein it has been
allegedly recorded that the petitioners therein were not in service from
the period 2007 to 2016 when they were considered for regularization.
Page 3
[9] Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel for the
petitioners, has referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
reported as (2014) 6 SCC 351 that the decision which has attained
finality cannot be re-opened as the same will amount to abuse of
process of law.
[10] This Court has considered the materials on record and
submissions made at the bar and especially the contents of para 32 of
the order dated 22.11.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 73 of
2019 & 26 of 2018 whereby the order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the
Joint Secretary (Education/S), Government of Manipur rejecting the
recommendations of the DPC was quashed and the State respondents
were directed to consider the case of the petitioners therein for
regularization.
[11] On perusal of para 32 of the abovementioned judgment,
the first part of setting aside the cancellation of recommendation of the
DPC is general order applicable to all 502 ad-hoc teachers and the
second direction for considering regularization was confined to the
petitioners before this Court only in those cases. Thereafter, in
compliance of the various directions of this Court, 230 ad-hoc teachers
were regularized by the State Government and the remaining ad-hoc
teachers out of 502 have also approached this Court by way of various
writ petitions claiming parity with those ad-hoc teachers whose services
have already been regularized by the State Government and those
matters are part heard before this Court.
[12] This Court is of the opinion that the effect of the
impugned order dated 10.10.2024 cancelling the decisions of the State
Page 4
Government to regularize 502 ad-hoc teachers amounts to reviewing
regularization of 230 ad-hoc teachers in compliance of the various
directions of this Court in the above mentioned writ petitions and
contempt petitions.
[13] In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the
effect and operation of the impugned order dated 10.10.2024 issued by
the Under Secretary (Education/S), Government of Manipur cancelling
the decision for regularization of the service of 502 adhoc teachers is
kept suspended with respect to the cancellation of regularization of 230
candidates done in pursuance to the directions of this Court, until
further orders.
[14] Learned A.G. submits that this Court may permit the
State respondent to approach appropriate forum for reopening of the
decisions already taken by the State in pursuance to the directions of
this Court.
[15] It is made clear that the State Government has every
right to approach appropriate forum and no permission is required from
this Court.
[16] List this case on 22.11.2024.
[17] Furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel
appearing for all the parties.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
KH. JOSHUA KH. JOSHUA MARING
MARING Date: 2024.10.25
16:49:06 +05'30'
Page 5
