[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Manipur High Court
Yengkhom Ashalata Devi & 35 Ors vs Vrs on 9 February, 2026
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Digitally
Lucy signed by Lucy
Gurumayum
Item Nos. 22
Gurum Date:
2026.02.09
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
ayum 15:39:57
+05'30'
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 808 of 2025
Yengkhom Ashalata Devi & 35 Ors ...Petitioner/s
Vrs.
State of Manipur & 2 Ors ...Respondent/s
-B E F O R E-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
09.02.2026
[1] Heard Mr. HS. Paonam, learned Sr. counsel assisted by
Ms. Lekhakumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners; Mrs. L.
Monomala, learned GA appearing for the respondent nos. 1 & 2;
and Mr. R.K. Deepak, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mrs. L.
Monica, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3.
[2] It is the case of the petitioners that all the petitioners
were appointed as Field Assistant (FA) in the Agriculture
Department by an order dated 07.01.2022 and that they all
possesses the Educational Qualification of B.Sc/M.Sc (Agri/Horti).
As all the petitioners has been appointed on 07.01.2022 and they
have rendered more than 3 years regular service and as such, they
are eligible and qualified to be considered for promotion to the
higher post of Assistant Agriculture Officer/Equivalent in the
Agriculture Department.
Page 1
[3] It is also the case of the petitioners that under the
Department of Agriculture, Manipur Assistant Agriculture Officer
and other post with identical scale of pay and similar duties (this
will be known as the cadre of Assistant Agriculture Officer)
Recruitment Rules, 2014 it is inter alia provided that Field Assistant
(FA)/Village Extension Worker (VEW) or its equivalent possessing
degree in B.Sc (Agri/Horti) from a recognized university with
3(three) years regular service in the grade are eligible and qualified
for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer/
Equivalent.
[4] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the
petitioners submitted that the Director of Agriculture, Manipur
wrote a letter dated 20.05.2025 to the Principal Secretary
(Agriculture), Government of Manipur stating inter alia that as
many as 41 posts of AAO ear marked for promotion quota are lying
vacant and as such, a proposal was made to convey the
administrative approval for filling up of the said 41 posts of
AAO/Equivalent by promotion.
[5] Drawing the attention of this Court at paragraph 3 of
the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Director (Agriculture),
Government of Manipur (R-2) and also at paragraph 4 & 5 of the
Page 2
affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Administrative Department (R-1),
it has been submitted by the learned Sr. counsel that the
authorities have clearly stated that after obtaining the
view/observation of the Department of Personnel, Government of
Manipur, necessary process is under way for taking further action
for filling up the said 41 posts ear marked for promotion quota as
per the relevant recruitment rules, and as advised by the
Department of Personnel.
[6] The learned Sr. counsel submitted that in view of the
undisputed facts and circumstances of the present case and in view
of the clear cut statement made by the respondents in their
affidavit-in-opposition, the present writ petition may be disposed of
by directing the respondents to filled up the aforesaid 41 vacant
posts of AAO/Equivalent by promotion strictly in terms of the
relevant recruitment rules within a stipulated period.
[7] Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appearing for the
respondent nos. 1 & 2 fairly submitted that the present writ
petition may be disposed of in terms of the statement made by the
respondent nos. 1 & 2 in their affidavit-in-opposition, however, the
learned GA submitted that adequate time to complete the process
Page 3
for filling up of the said 41 vacant posts may be given to the
respondents.
[8] Mr. R.K. Deepak, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the
respondent no. 3 also fairly submitted that MPSC will take up
necessary steps for considering the proposal submitted by the
respondent nos. 1 & 2 for sending recommendation to filled up the
aforesaid 41 posts as early as possible and that in any case the
whole process will be completed within a period of two months
from the date receipt of the proposal sent by the respondent nos. 1
& 2.
[9] Taking into consideration the undisputed facts and
circumstances of the present case and the submission advance by
the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also on careful
consideration of the materials available on record, this Court is of
the considered view that it will be in the interest of justice to issue
the following directions.
(i) The respondent nos. 1 & 2 are hereby
directed to complete the process for filling up
aforesaid 41 vacant posts of AAO/Equivalent
strictly in terms of the applicable rules and to
sent the proposal for filling up the said post to
Page 4
the MPSC within a period of two months from
today.
(ii) The respondent no.3 (MPSC) is hereby
directed to complete the process of selection
and to sent its recommendation as early as
possible but not later than two months from
the date of receipt of the proposal sent by the
respondent nos. 1 & 2.
(iii) The respondent nos. 1 & 2 are further
directed to issue necessary appointment order
of the recommended candidates sent by the
respondent no. 3 as early as possible but not
later than one month from the receipt of the
proposal or recommendation sent by the
MPSC.
[10] With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition
is hereby disposed of.
[11] There will be no cost.
JUDGE
Lucy
Page 5
