1. Heard Mr. Kh. Chonjohn, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. Ashang, learned Government advocate, Manipur.

2. Briefly stated, the fact of the case is that the petitioner, who was appointed as LDC in the year 1962, was promoted as Accounts Officer in the year 1996. The Manipur Finance Service Rules came into force with effect from 24.4.1998, on which date the Rule was published in the Manipur Extraordinary Gazette. In Schedule-1 of the Rules, three Grades are provided and they are as follows : -

(i) Finance Service Grade-I;

(ii) Finance Service Grade-II; and

(iii) Finance Service Grade-Ill.

The authorized permanent strength of the service is also indicated under the aforesaid Schedule. Accounts Officers/State Treasury Officers/Assistant Treasury Officer, etc., specified in Scheduled-I, are the posts under Grade-III of the Manipur Finance Service.

3. Rule 6 of the Manipur Finance Service provides for initial-appointment of persons to the service and according to this rule, consent is required from the incumbents holding posts equivalent to posts specified in the Schedule-I as Grade-III, before being appointed to the Manipur Finance Service. In order to implement the provisions of the aforesaid service rules, an exercise was undertaken by the authority seeking option/consent of the officers holding the posts equivalent to posts specified in Schedule-I and the petitioner, who was then holding the post of Accounts Officer in the Department of Commerce and Industries, Government of Manipur, along with others, opted for the Manipur Finance Service. Thereafter, a final seniority list of officers holding the posts equivalent to posts specified in Schedule-I of the Manipur Finance Service, was published by the Government on 2.1.1999 and in that, the name of the petitioner appeared at SI. No. 25.

4. By an order dated 31.3.1999 issued by the Government of Manipur, 28 officers from the seniority list mentioned above, including some junior to the petitioner, came to be appointed as Grade-III officers in the Manipur Finance Service by way of initial appointments to the service. The petitioner and some others were excluded from being absorbed/appointed on the ground that some vigilance proceeding was pending against them at the time of consideration for appointment to Manipur Finance Service Grade-III. The vigilance proceeding came to be cleared by the Director of Vigilance stating that the charges against the three officers including the petitioner, were not proved vide, Memorandum dated 28.8.1999. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case of the petitioner and others who were subjected to vigilance proceeding at the time of appointment to MFS Grade-III by the Selection Committee, is well taken care of by paras 3 and 4 of the Government order dated 31.3.1999 by which 28 officers have been appointed as MFS Grade-III. Paras 3 and 4 of the order dated 31.3.1999 are quoted below : -

"3. This order is without prejudice to the interest of those officers whose cases have not been considered by the Selection Committee on 16.3.1999 for administrative reasons.

4. The inter se seniority of the officers mentioned under para 1 above and those of the officers referred to in para 3 above shall be notified later on."

5. After several representations from the petitioner requesting the Government to formally accept the clearance given by the Director of Vigilance, as referred to above, only on 23.5.2000, the Government formally declared that the Departmental Enquiry against the petitioner was closed. It is contended that despite formal closure of the Departmental Enquiry, no steps was taken by the Government to consider appointment of the petitioner to Grade-III of the Manipur Finance Service. However, it is seen from the record that Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel, Government of Manipur vide letter dated 25.1.2002 (Annexure-9 to the writ-petition) sought vigilance clearance from the Special Secretary, Vigilance in r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document