Back
2022 Supreme(Manipur) 102
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
M.V. Muralidaran, J.
Thounaojam Priyoranjan & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Manipur & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 178 of 2021
Decided On : 08-06-2022
Mr. Anjan Prasad Shu, Advocate, Mr. BP Sahu, Sr. Advocate, for the Petitioner; Mrs. Ch. Sundari, GA, for the Respondents
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that appointments made following due process and duly approved by the competent authority cannot be arbitrarily cancelled by another authority at a later time.
Headnote:
Appointment - Ad-hoc Committee - - [State Project Director, SSA/SMA, Manipur, letter dated 30.6.2012, Ad-hoc School Management Committee order dated 17.10.2012] - The court discussed the appointment of the petitioners by the Ad-hoc Committee chaired by the then MLA, which was approved by the Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education, SSA. The court found that the appointment process followed due process and was duly approved by the competent authority, and therefore, the cancellation of the appointment by the Deputy Commissioner was held to be illegal and arbitrary.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were appointed in teaching and non-teaching posts in a Residential School. Their appointment was cancelled by the Deputy Commissioner, leading to the filing of the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointment of the petitioners was made following due process and duly approved by the competent authority. The cancellation of their appointment by the Deputy Commissioner was deemed illegal and arbitrary.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the appointment of the petitioners and the subsequent cancellation by the Deputy Commissioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointment process followed due process and was duly approved by the competent authority, making the cancellation of the appointment by the Deputy Commissioner illegal and arbitrary.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to allow the petitioners to continue in their posts without any obstructions.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order dated 30.01.2021, whereby the appointment of the petitioners was cancelled by the third respondent and to direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue in their posts without any obstructions from any side.
2. Heard Mr.Anjan Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.Ch.Sundari, learned Government Advocate.
3. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed in the teaching and non-teaching posts respectively in Residential School, Chingkheiching, Imphal East on 28.9.2012 by the Chairperson, Ad-hoc Committee. The appointment of the petitioners was done by the Ad-hoc Committee and the same was chaired by the then Member of the Legislative Assembly. According to the petitioner, the formation of the said Ad-hoc Committee was approved by the then Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education, SSA, Imphal East. While so, on 27.1.2021, the petitioners were served with show cause notices directing them to appear on 30.1.2021 before the Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education, SSA with relevant documents in support of their position. Accordingly, all the petitioners appeared before the concerned authority in person along with relevant documents. However, on the same day, the Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education, Imphal East passed the impugned order cancelling the appointment of the petitioners along with others thereby disengaging them with immediate effect. Challenging the same, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.
4. The respondents 1 to 3 filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that the State Project Director, SSA/SMA, Manipur vide letter dated 30.6.2012 addressed to the Deputy Commissioners, including the Deputy Commissioner, Imphal East to make necessary arrangements in connection with opening of 7 new Residential Schools. The said letter specifically mentions that formation of an Ad-hoc Committee with the concerned District Program Manager as Chairman to run the Residential Schools. But the said Ad-hoc School Management Committee approved by the then Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education vide order dated 17.10.2012, the Chairperson is the then MLA, Khurai Assembly Constituency, which is contrary to the direction issued by the concerned authority. Thus, the appointment orders issued to the petitioners dated 28.9.2012 are non-est in the eye of law and allowing to continue their services will only perpetuate irregularities/illegalities. Hence, the prayer of the writ petition is liable to be rejected outright for the ends of justice.
5. Assailing the impugned order, Mr. Anjan Prasad Sahu, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners and others were appointed on 28.9.2012 to various teaching and non-teaching posts in Residential School, Chingkheiching, Imphal East for a period until further orders and that the same was duly signed by the Chairperson, Ad-hoc Committee. He would submit that the said appointments were made pursuant to the resolution passed by the Ad-hoc Committee chaired by the then MLA and the formation of the said Ad-hoc Committee chaired by the MLA, Khurai Assembly Constituency for the year 2011-12 was approved by the then Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Board of Education, SSA on 17.10.2012.
6. The learned counsel further submitted that while the petitioners are working pursuant to their appointments and status, on 27.1.2021 they were served with show cause notices directing them to appear before the Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, School Management Committee, Residential School on 30.1.2021 along with relevant records. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners were appeared before the said authority with relevant documents. However, the Deputy C
