Manipur High Court
Elizabeth Kimte vs Union Of India & Ors on 21 January, 2025
Author: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
Bench: Ahanthem Bimol Singh
SHOUGRAKPAM Digitally signed by IN. 3 & 4
SHOUGRAKPAM DEVANANDA
DEVANANDA SINGH
Date: 2025.01.21 13:49:01
SINGH +05'30'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 884 of 2024
Elizabeth Kimte ... Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India & ors. ... Respondents
With
MC(WP(C)) No. 813 of 2024
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH
O R D E R
21-01-2025
Heard Mr. Serto T. Kom, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr. Boboy Potsangbam, learned CGSC appearing for the
respondents.
The matter is taken up today for consideration of the prayer
for passing interim order.
The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed on
30-05-2012 as a Veterinary Officer in RIMS on contract basis pursuant
to a recommendation made by the Selection Committee. It has been
stated that the post was initially advertised for filling up on contract basis
and pursuant to the recommendation of the Selection Committee, she
has been appointed on contract basis and she has been continuing till
today for the last about thirteen years without any interruption. The
learned counsel further submitted that without considering her case for
regularization, the authorities have issued another Advertisement for
filling up the said post on regular basis and that the selection method
and the eligibility criteria as prescribed under the rules remains basically
the same and the petitioner is quite eligible except for the age bar
prescribed under the recruitment rules. The learned counsel further
submitted that in view of the settled law rendered by the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of “Jaggo Vs. Union of India” reported in 2024 SCC
WP(C) No. 884 of 2024 Contd…/-
-2-
Online SC 3826 at para. 20 of the judgment, the petitioner is entitled to
get her service regularized and that the authorities have not considered
this aspect at all. The learned counsel further submitted that unless an
interim order is passed for staying the impugned Advertisement and the
selection process during the pendency of the writ petition, the valuable
right of the petitioner will be deprived.
Mr. Boboy Potsangbam, learned CGSC appearing for the
respondents submitted that he needs to get instruction from the
authorities and to file a detailed affidavit. The learned CGSC,
accordingly, prays for granting three weeks’ time for filing a detailed
affidavit.
Taking into consideration the materials available on record
and the submission advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, this court is of the considered view that unless an interim
order is passed, the claim of the petitioner will be defeated and the
present writ petition will be rendered infructuous. Accordingly, it is
hereby directed that the impugned Advertisement dated 18-12-2024, so
far as it concerns the post of Veterinary Officer, shall remain suspended
till the next date of hearing. In other words, the respondents should not
take up any further process for filling up the said post of Veterinary
Officer pursuant to the impugned Advertisement dated 18-12-2024 till
the next date of hearing.
As the interim order has been passed without the counter
affidavit of the respondents, liberty is given to the respondents to
approach this court for modification or vacation of this interim order.
List these cases again on 27-02-2025.
JUDGE
Devananda
WP(C) No. 884 of 2024 Contd.../-
[ad_1]
Source link