Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
M.V. Muralidaran, J.
Malemnganba Angomjambam - Appellant
Versus
State Of Manipur & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 211 of 2018, W.P. (C) No. 146 of 2018, WP (C) No. 152 of 2018, WP (C) No. 231 of 2018, WP (C) No. 241 of 2018
Decided On : 16-11-2022
Show Cause Notices - Employment Dispute - Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution - [Section 2, Section 14, Section 15, Section 16, Section 17, Section 18, Section 19, Section 20, Section 21, Section 22, Section 23, Section 24, Section 25, Section 26] - The court discussed the irregularities in the appointment process and the issuance of show cause notices to the petitioners. It highlighted the principles of natural justice, the role of the Special Investigation Team (SIT), and the arbitrary exercise of power by the authorities. The court found that the show cause notices were unsustainable and set them aside.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were appointed to various positions in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur. They were issued show cause notices calling for the cancellation of their appointments based on alleged irregularities and excess appointments.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the show cause notices were unsustainable as they were issued without providing the petitioners with the necessary documents and without affording them a fair opportunity to respond. The court also noted that the appointments of the petitioners were based on merit and recommendation by the DPC, and the alleged irregularities were not due to the fault of the petitioners.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the show cause notices and the alleged irregularities in the appointment process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the show cause notices violated the principles of natural justice and were issued in an arbitrary manner. It emphasized that the appointments of the petitioners were based on merit and recommendation by the DPC, and the alleged irregularities were not attributable to the petitioners.
Final Decision: All the writ petitions were allowed, and the impugned show cause notices dated 6.2.2018 in respect of the petitioners were set aside.
JUDGMENT
1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners to quash the impugned show cause notices dated 6.2.2018 issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Government of Manipur.
2. Brief facts are as follows:
The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.211 of 2018 was appointed to the post of driver on 16.12.2016 in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur in pursuance of the advertisement dated 27.9.2016. Subsequent upon the appointment, he was transferred and posted at the Director Office vide order dated 6.2.2017 and thereafter, he was attached with the office of the Hon'ble Minister/CAF & PD, Manipur vide order dated 17.7.2017 issued by the Director. The petitioner has been discharging his duty very sincerely, efficiently and with the full satisfaction of his senior officer. While so, to his utter shock and surprise, the Under Secretary issued the impugned show cause notice. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.
2.1. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.146 of 2018 was appointed to the post of Civil Supply Inspector on 31.12.2016 in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur in pursuance of the advertisement dated 22.10.2016. Subsequent upon the appointment, she was posted at the office of DSO (CAF&PD), Imphal East and she has been discharging her duty very sincerely, efficiently and with the full satisfaction of her senior officer. While so, to her utter shock and surprise, the Under Secretary issued the impugned show cause notice. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.
2.2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.152 of 2018 was appointed to the post of Quality Inspector on 07.12.2016 in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur in pursuance of the advertisement dated 27.9.2016. Subsequent upon the appointment, he joined at the office of the Director, Department of CAF&PD and after joining, the petitioner underwent training for Quality Inspector and thereafter, he was transferred to the office of the DSO (CAF&PD), Thoubal on 11.5.2017. The petitioner is discharging his duty very sincerely, efficiently and with the full satisfaction of his senior officer. While so, to his utter shock and surprise, the Under Secretary issued the impugned show cause notice. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.
2.3. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.231 of 2018 was appointed to the post of Store Handler on 03.01.2017 in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur in pursuance of the advertisement dated 27.9.2016. Subsequent upon the appointment, he was posted at Director Office and has been discharging his duty very sincerely, efficiently and with the full satisfaction of his senior officer. While so, to his utter shock and surprise, the Under Secretary issued the impugned show cause notice. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.
2.4. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.241 of 2018 was appointed to the post of driver on 14.12.2016 in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Manipur in pursuance of the advertisement dated 27.9.2016. Subsequent upon the appointment, he was transferred and posted at the office of the (State Commission), Manipur on 1.4.2017 and he has been discharging his duty very sincerely, efficiently and with the full satisfaction of his senior officer. While so, to his utter shock and surprise, the Under Secretary issued the impugned show cause notice. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.
3. Resisting the writ petitions, the respondent State filed affidavit-in-oppositions. Since the averments set out in all the affidavits are one and the same, the averments in affidavit-in-opposition filed in W.P.(C) No.146 of 2018 is taken as lead affidavit.
4. In the affidavit-in-opposition, the respondents stated that the impugned show cause notice dated 6.2.2018 was issued on the advice of the Special Inv
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice in administrative actions, particularly in employment disputes.
The impugned show cause notice was issued without proper consideration, and the rejection of representations and denial of joining posting place were unjust and arbitrary, violating Article 14 and 16....
The impugned actions were quashed as they were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and the directions of the court. The court found that the cancellation of the appointment order....
Dismissals from service upheld due to misconduct; appointments not conferring rights due to violation of recruitment procedures. Legality and fairness in employment processes must align with statutor....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
