Manipur High Court
Ym. Md. Abid Hussain vs State Of Manipur& 152 Ors on 2 September, 2021
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
KABORA Digitally signed
Item No. 6
by
MBAM KABORAMBAM
SAPANA SAPANA CHANU
Date: 2021.09.02 (Through video conferencing)
CHANU 16:18:29 +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 774 of 2017
YM. Md. Abid Hussain
.... Petitioner/s
- Versus -
State of Manipur& 152 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 02.09.2021 Heard Mr. Th. Khagemba, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned AG Manipur appearing for the State respondents and Mr. S. Bishwajit, learned counsel appearing for some of the private respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the recruitment process and appointment of the private respondents to the post of Sub- Inspector in the Manipur Police Department pursuant to the recruitment test held in 2008.
The main ground of challenging the said recruitment process and appointment is that many of the selected candidates were not successful in the written test and accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed with a prayer for cancelling the recruitment process as well as the appointment of the private respondents to the post of Sub-Inspector and also for directing the State authorities to held the recruitment process afresh. 1
When the matter is taken up today, it has been submitted by all the counsel appearing for the parties that pleadings are complete and the matter can be posted for final hearing and disposal.
However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in 2 (two) similar writ petitions viz. WP(C) No. 984 of 2008 and WP(C) No. 806 of 2014, this Court passed an order on 12.01.2017 wherein, the State authorities were directed to consider the case of the petitioner in that writ petitions for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police to 1 (one) vacant post.
It has further been submitted that pursuant to the direction given by this Court, the State Government consider the case of the said writ petitioner and the said writ petitioner has been subsequently appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police by an order dated 25.05.2018. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the aforesaid two writ petitionsand the present writ petitioner are similarly situated, the State respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Sub-Inspector of Police in any available vacancy, as done earlier by this Court.
I have perused the order dated 12.01.2017 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 984 of 2008 and W.P. (C) No. 806 of 2014 as well as the order dated 25.05.2018 issued by the Government appointing one Shri. Th. Roson Singh, who is the petitioner in the said 2 (two) writ petitions, as Sub-Inspector of Police.
2
In view of the above, this Court findforce in the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and accordingly, the respondents No. 1 & 2 is directed to consider the case of the present petitioner for appointment to any available vacant post of Sub-Inspector of Police within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
It is also made clear that in the event of inability being expressed by the State Government to accommodate the present writ petitioner, the present writ petition will be heard on merit.
It is further made clear that the present order has been passed without going into merit of the present case and with a view to avoid disturbing the appointment of the private respondents made by the State Government. The State Government can consider the case of the petitioner strictly in terms of the relevant rules.
List this case again on 13.12.2021.
JUDGE Sapana 3