Laishram Radhakishore Singh, S/o. (Late) L. Nityai Singh vs State of Manipur, represented by the Additional Chief Secretary (Forest and Environment), Govt. of Manipur

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Manipur) 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH, J.
Shri Laishram Radhakishore Singh, S/o. (Late) L. Nityai Singh - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Manipur, represented by the Additional Chief Secretary (Forest and Environment), Govt. of Manipur and Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) No. 810 of 2022
Decided On : 14-03-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. N. Jotendro, Sr. Adv., Mr. Murtaza Ahmed, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. M. Devananda, Addl. AG, Ms. Jyotsana, Adv., Mr. H. S Paonam, Sr. Adv., Mr. S. Gunabanta, Adv.

Headnote:(A) Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Section 5(1), 5(3), 6(1)(g), Rule 23 - Writ petition challenging termination of service as Chairman of Manipur Pollution Control Board due to alleged illegal appointments - The court emphasizes the necessity of prior approval from the government for appointments exceeding set pay scales. (Paras 16-18)

(B) Natural Justice - The principles mandate adherence to fair procedures in administrative actions affecting individual rights. The court quashes the termination order for failing to abide by these principles. (Paras 20-22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged his removal as Chairman of MPCB alleging the procedure for termination was not followed, and asserting the legality of appointments made under directives from the National Green Tribunal. (Paras 4-10)

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the petitioner failed to obtain necessary prior approvals for appointments beyond the prescribed pay scale and violated prescribed procedures. (Paras 16-18)

Issues: The key issues include the legality of terminating service prior to the completion of the term and the validity of the petitioner’s appointments.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concludes that the termination was justified due to contraventions of statutory requirements, affirming that the petitioner abused his position by making unsanctioned appointments.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. proper appointment rules and procedures. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. challenging the legitimacy of the appointments. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14)
3. adherence to statutory provisions for employment. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
4. judicial assessment of prior actions and decisions. (Para 19 , 20)
5. writ petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 21)

JUDGMENT :

(Ahanthem Bimol Singh, J.) :

Heard Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. M. Devananda, learned Addl. AG assisted by Ms. Jyotsana, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 & 2 and Mr. H. S Paonam, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Gunabanta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3.

[2] The present writ petition had been filed challenging two orders both dated 20.09.2022, one order terminating the service of the petitioner as Chairman of Manipur Pollution Control Board and the other appointing the respondent No. 3 as Chairman of the Manipur Pollution Control Board (MPCB).

[3] The brief facts of the case is that by an order dated 24.03.2017 issued by the Chief Secretary (For. & Envt), Government of Manipur, the petitioner was appointed as Chairman of Manipur Pollution Control Board with immediate effect and until further orders. The term of the office of the Chairman of MPCB as provided under Section 5 (1) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act” for short) is of three years from the date of nomination. During the term of his office as the Chairman of MPCB, the petitioner issued various orders dated 3.5.2018, 8.6.2018, 18.6.2018, 1.8.2018, 3.8.2018, 23.8.2018, 7.9.2018, 14.9.2018 and 29.10.2018 appointing as many as 118 (one hundred and eighteen) persons on contract basis in the following different capacities carrying the pay scale noted against the post:-

Sl. No.	Designation	Pay Scale
1.	Assistant Environmental Engineer	Rs.9300 + 4400 (GP)
2.	Assistant Law Officer	Rs.9300 + 4400 (GP),
3.	Jr. Environmental Engineer, Assistant Programmer, Assistant I.T Officer, Assistant Programmer and Junior Law Officer	Rs. 9300 + 4200 (GP),
4.	Environmental Scientist, Field Inspector, Sr. Scientific Assistant, Computer Operator, Data Collector and Smoke Emission Tester	Rs. 5200 + 2800 (GP),
5.	Sample Collector, Laboratory Assistant and Store Keeper	Rs. 5200 + 2400 (GP),
6.	Account Assistant, Assistant Field Inspector, LDC, Driver, Legal Assistant and Photographer	Rs. 5200 + 1900 (GP),
7.	Grade – IV and Laboratory Attendant	Rs. 4440 + 1300 (GP).

[4] During the tenure of the service of the petitioner as the Chairman of MPCB, the State Government issued a rule called ‘Appointment of Chairman of Manipur Pollution Control Board (MPCB), 2021’ (hereinafter referred to as “the said Rule” for short). Subsequent to the framing of the said Rule, the State Government issued an order dated 30-07-2021 re-constituting the MPCB consisting of 11 (eleven) members including the petitioner as the Chairman of the said reconstituted board. It is the case of the petitioner that before completion of the tenure of his service of three years as provided under Section 5 (1) of the said Act and Rule 2 (iii) (b) of the said Rule, the State Government issued an order dated 14-07-2022 appointing the respondent No. 3 as the Chairman of MPCB with immediate effect and until further orders.

[5] Having being aggrieved, the petitioner assailed the appointment of the respondent No. 3 by filing WP(C) No. 562 of 2022 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Judgment and Order dated 11-08-2022 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 562 of 2022 by quashing the impugned order dated 14-07-2022 and by giving liberty to the State Government to re-consider the case of the petitioner by followi