The main legal point established is that the granting of extra ordinary leave did not amount to a violation of human rights as defined in the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, and the employee is bound by the Service Rules, 1998.

T.N.K. Singh, J.

1. Heard Mr. Genananda, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. Th. Joy Raj, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents.

2. By this writ petition, the Petitioners are assailing the notices dated 7.8.1999 and 29.10.1999 issued by the learned Manipur Human Rights Commission asking the Petitioner No. 2, Manager (Admn/Production) to appear in person or through authorized agents in connection with the Complaint case No. 90 of 1999 filed by the Respondent No. 2, Shri Laishram Chaoba Singh.

3. The precise fact leading to the filing of the present writ petition is that the Petitioner No. 1 "The Manipur Electronics Development Corporation" is a body corporate registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having perpetual succession with a common seal. It was established with the object stated in the Memorandum of Association. As per Article 118 of Article of Association of the Corporation, management and general administration of the Corporation are vested in the Board of Directors and Article 119 gives certain specific powers enumerated therein, to the Director and Managing Director who is the Executive Head of the Corporation.

4. The service conditions of the employees of the corporation/Petitioner No. 1 are governed and regulated by the Service Rules framed and published in the year, 1998. Chapter IV of the Manipur State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd., Service Rules, 1998 (for short Service Rules, 1998) deal with the conduct, discipline, suspension and appeals of the employees of the Petitioner No. 1/corporation. Rule 21 of the Service Rules, 1998 specifically stated that every employee shall conform to and abide by these Rules and shall observe, comply with and obey all orders and directions which may from time to time be given to him or/her by any person or persons under whose jurisdiction, superintendence or control him/her may for the time being be placed. Rule 32 of the Service Rules, 1998 more fully mention the "act and omission constituting misconduct". In Rule 34 of the Service Rules, 1998 Disciplinary Authorities are specified in Schedule A or any other authorities higher man the Disciplinary Authority. Admittedly, Respondent No. 2, Shri Laishram Chaoba Singh is an employee of the category III of the Petitioner No. 1/corporation and the Managing Director is the Disciplinary Authority and the Board of Directors is the Appellate Authority. Under Rule 48 of the Service Rules, 1998 any employee, against whom, any order imposing upon the employee any of the penalty specified in the Rules or order of suspension has been issued shall have the right to appeal against any such orders issued by the superior authority which injuriously affect the interest of the employee, within 1 (one) month of the date of such order. For easy reference Rule 48, 49 and 50 of the Service Rules, 1998 are quoted hereunder

48. Right to Appeal:

An employee, against whom, any order imposing upon the employee any of the penalties specified in Rules or Order of Suspension has been issued shall have right to appeal against any such order issued by a Superior Authority, which injuriously affects the interest of the employee, within one month of the date of such order.

49. Appellate Authorities:

An appeal shall lie against any order passed by any Competent Authority to the Appellate Authority as specified in Schedule "B" Annexed to these Rules.

50. Conditions which an Appeal should satisfy:

Every appeal shall comply with the following requirements:

(i) It shall be written in English or if not written in English, be accompanied by a translated copy in English and shall be signed;

(ii) It shall be couched in polite and respectful language and shall be free from unnecessary padding or superfluous verbiage;

(iii) It shall contain all material statements and arguments relied on, and shall be complete in itself;

(iv) It shall specify the relief desired;

(v) It shall be submitted through the proper channel.

5. Kinds of leaves of the employee of th