IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established is the court's emphasis on preventing academic disruption and the lack of evidence to challenge the eligibility and suitability of the successful candidate.

JUDGMENT

M.C.(WP(C)) No.14 of 2021 has been filed by the applicants seeking to vacate the interim order dated 19.3.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.193 of 2020 so as to enable the applicants to appoint the successful candidate to the post of Associate Professor in the Department of Biotechnology, Manipur University (1-UR) under Advertisement No.3/19 dated 27.5.2019.

2. M.C.(WP(C)) No.17 of 2021 has been filed by the applicant - Thiyam Ramsing Singh seeking to vacate the same interim order dated 19.3.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.193 of 2020.

3. The applicants in M.C.(WP(C)) No.14 of 2021 are the Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar of Manipur University. The first respondent is the writ petitioner and the second respondent is the proforma respondent who is the applicant in M.C.(WP(C)) No.17 of 2021.

4. The case of Manipur University is that the writ petitioner filed the writ petition with the prayer to nullify the list of candidates approved by the Executive Council in its meeting held on 14.3.2020 for appointment of the third respondent Thiya Ramsing Singh to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR) in the Department of Biotechnology. When the writ petition was listed on 19.3.2020 for admission, while issuing notice, this Court passed an interim order not to give appointment to the third respondent to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR) in the Department of Biotechnology till the next returnable date and in view of the said interim order, the appointment of the third respondent is being put on hold.

5. The writ petitioner filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that any appointment if to be issued in view of the impugned result, the writ petitioner, who is a well qualified person for consideration of her appointment to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR), Department of Biotechnology, shall suffer an irreparable loss. It is stated that the writ petitioner is more eligible than the third respondent. However, by way of playing favoritism and nepotism the writ petitioner has been rejected by the inaction of the authority of Manipur University. It is also stated that before filing W.P.(C) No.193 of 2020, the writ petitioner has also filed W.P.(C) No.177 of 2020 challenging the final list of eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Professor (1-UR), 2 post of Associate Professor (1-UR, 1-SC) in the Department of Biotechnology as the same was issued in violation of the UGC norms and Ordinance 19 of Manipur University. In W.P.(C) No.177 of 2020, this Court granted an interim order on 6.3.2020 and despite proper communication of the order dated 6.3.2020, the official respondents issued the Executive Council decision dated 14.3.2020 under which the third respondent has been selected to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR). The writ petitioner having left with no alternative had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.193 of 2020 praying for staying the Executive Council’s decision dated 14.3.2020.

6. The case of the third respondent is that the list of candidates approved by the Executive Council in its meeting held on 14.3.2020 for the appointment of the third respondent to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR) in the Department of Biotechnology has already been issued and based on the third respondent’s overall qualifications and credentials, he was selected as the best and suitable candidate from all the other candidates. Since the appointment of the third respondent to the post of Associate Professor, Biotechnology Department has been stayed, his right to be appointed as Associate Professor in the Biotechnology Department has been infringed.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant Manipur University submitted that since the result has been declared on 14.3.2020 for appointment to the post of Associate Professor (1-UR) in the Department of Biotechnology, the issuance of the appointment order to the successful candidate namely the third respondent is necessary and make the appointment accordingly so that academic career of the students