Ayekpam Kiranjit Singh & 26 Ors vs State Of Manipur & Anr on 4 April, 2026

Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma

Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma

                                                                   Item No. 2-3


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                          AT IMPHAL

                        WP(C) No. 260 of 2026 with
                        MC(WP(C) No. 284 of 2026

      Ayekpam Kiranjit Singh & 26 Ors.
                                                        .....Petitioner/s
                                     -Versus-
      State of Manipur & Anr.
                                                        ....Respondent/s

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA

Order 04.04.2026 [1] Heard Mr. HS. Paona, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Arunkumar, learned counsel for the petitioners. [2] The 27 (Twenty seven) petitioners have approached this Court for quashing (i) the proceedings of the emergency meeting of the Syndicate, Dhanamanjuri University (DMU) held on 18.07.2024 (Annexure-A/4); (ii) notification dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure-A/7) so far as it relates to fresh interview for the additional posts of 9 (nine) Assistant Professors in Physics and 7 (seven) Assistant Professors in Botany subject; and (iii) notification dated 17.03.2026 issued by the Registrar, DMU for conducting interview for 9 (nine) additional posts of Assistant Professors in Physics and 7 (seven) in Botany and (iv) notification dated 18.03.2026 issued by the Registrar, DMU fixing the interview for Botany on 06.04.2026 and Physics on 07.04.2026.

[3] It is submitted that the petitioners are aspirants for appearing in the interview fixed by notification dated 17.03.2026 issued by the Registrar, DMU. However, in terms of para 2 of the resolution No. 2 of the emergency Syndicate meeting held on 18.07.2024, the interview for the two subjects will be confined to those candidates who have earlier appeared in the interview in terms of the advertisement No. 3/2020 dated 19.12.2020 whereby calling for application from the intending candidates for 88 (Eighty eight) posts of Assistant Professor in 22 (Twenty two) subjects/departments.

[4] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that by the proceedings of the emergency Syndicate meeting held on 18.07.2024, earlier notification dated 29.02.2024 recommending selection of 83 (Eighty three) candidates as Assistant Professors in 21 subjects was declared null and void on the ground that approval of the State Government was not obtained before declaring the result and it was resolved to conduct fresh interview for Physics and Botany subjects. The reason to conduct fresh interview for Physics and Botany subjects was due to blank tabulation sheets and no assessment was made for the candidates who have appeared in the interview.

[5] After considering the recommendation of the Selection Committee, the Syndicate accepted the recommendation and also approved additional 60 (sixty) teaching posts in 16 (sixteen) different subjects/departments. In terms of the resolution of the Syndicate meeting dated 18.07.2024, the Vice-Chancellor, DMU published another notification dated 18.07.2024 for appointment of candidates for various subjects excluding the candidates for Physics and Botany earlier recommended vide notification dated 29.02.2024; and addendum dated 18.07.2024 was issued stating that notification dated 18.07.2024 was issued in supersession of the earlier notification dated 29.02.2024. Thereafter, the Registrar, DMU issued another notification dated 19.07.2024 fixing the date of fresh interview for Assistant Professors in Botany and Physics with effect from 30.07.2024 in terms of the decision of resolution No. 2 of the Syndicate meeting held on 18.07.2024. [6] It may be noted that in a batch of writ petitions filed by the selected candidates in Physics and Botany and vide order dated 29.07.2024 in WP(C) No. 501 of 2024, this Court kept under suspension the notification dated 19.07.2024 for conducting fresh interview in Physics and Botany till the next date and the interim order has been extended from time to time. Vide another order dated 22.08.2025 in the batch of pending writ petitions, this Court modified the interim order dated 29.07.2024 permitting DMU to conduct interview for 9 (nine) additional posts of Assistant Professors in Physics and 7 (seven) additional posts of Assistant Professors in Botany and keeping on hold fresh appointment against 4 (four) posts each in Physics and Botany. The interim order was modified in terms of the affidavit dated 20.08.2025 filed by the Registrar, DMU in pursuance to the direction of this Court regarding the number of seats proposed for interview in terms of the notification dated 19.07.2024. It was stated that the total number of seats proposed for interview are 13 (thirteen) for Physics and 11 (eleven) for Botany.

[7] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that petitioner Nos. 9, 25 & 27 have applied in terms of the advertisement dated 19.12.2020 and their names were shown in the list of eligible candidates for Botany issued by the DMU vide notification dated 09.09.2021. However, it is admitted that they were not shortlisted for appearing in the interview in terms of the advertisement dated 19.12.2020. It is also submitted that the remaining petitioners are eligible after the year 2021 and if they are not allowed to appear in the interview for additional posts vide notification dated 17.03.2026, it will affect their rights for appearing and consideration for appointment. [8] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that while modifying the interim order by order dated 22.08.2025, this Court did not give any direction that the interview would be confined to the candidates who had appeared earlier and it is submitted that the petitioners be permitted to appear in the interview to be conducted on 06.04.2026 and 07.04.2026 in terms of the notification dated 17.03.2026.

 [9]         Issue notice.
[10]        Mr. N. Jyotsana, learned counsel assisting Mr. M.

Devananda, learned Addl. A.G. accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 (State) and Mr. I. Denning, learned counsel on behalf of respondent No. 2 (DMU).

[11] Mr. M. Devananda, learned Addl. A.G., submits that writ petition is not maintainable in the present form. As per para 7 of the general instructions in the advertisement dated 19.12.2024, the University has right to change the number of positions, i.e., vacancy may increase or decrease and resolution No. 2 of the Syndicate meeting held on 18.07.2024 recommending additional seats of 60 (sixty) posts in 16 (sixteen) subjects are in terms of para 7 of the general conditions of the advertisement. Learned Addl. A.G. submits that 4 (four) of the petitioners i.e. petitioner Nos. 9, 24, 25 & 27 applied for Botany and 3 (three) of them found eligible, but none of them was shortlisted for appearing in the interview for Botany. Since their exclusion in the shortlisted candidates has not been challenged, the four petitioners have no locus to file the present writ petition. With respect to the remaining petitioners, it is submitted that they were not eligible when the advertisement was issued. The proposed interview is in terms of the advertisement dated 19.12.2020 and they cannot be considered for interview as they are not eligible on the date fixed in the advertisement.

[12] Learned Addl. A.G. also draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 22.08.2025 passed by this Court whereby the interim order dated 29.07.2024 was modified for conducting fresh interview for Physics and Botany. Reading para 4 & 6 of the order together, it is clear that the interview is meant for the candidates who have already applied and appeared in earlier interview in terms of the advertisement dated 19.12.2020. It is pointed out that there is no fresh advertisement. [13] Mr. I. Denning, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, adopts the submissions of learned Addl. A.G. [14] This Court is of the view that some of the prayers in the present writ petition, i.e., challenge to resolution No. 2 of the Syndicate meeting held on 18.07.2024 and notification dated 19.07.2024 for fresh interview for Physics and Botany, are substantially subject matter of the pending writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 501 of 2024 and the connected matters awaiting pronouncement of order.

[15] In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to pass any interim order at this stage. However, the appointment, if any, in terms of the notification dated 17.03.2026 for 9 (nine) posts of Physics and 7 (seven) posts of Botany will be subject to the outcome of the present writ petition.

[16] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that there is inadvertent mistake in the list of dates under the captioned synopsis and he may be permitted to change the same. [17] The oral prayer is allowed and the corrected copy may be filed within three days and necessary incorporation in the online filing.

           [18]           List this case on 11.05.2026.
           [19]           Registry is directed to delete the name of Mr. A. Bheigya,

learned Jr. G.A. and in his place, reflect the name of Ms. N. Jyotsana as learned counsel for respondent No. 1 in the cause list.

KH.    Digitally signed
       by KH. JOSHUA
JOSHUA MARING                                                                JUDGE
       Date: 2026.04.04
MARING 18:38:29 +05'30'
                  Kh. Joshua Maring