Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 427 (GAU)

H. R. Kahangpam v. State of Manipur and Ors.

2006-05-08

T.NANDA KUMAR SINGH

body2006
1. Heard Mr. A. Vashum, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Md. Jalal Uddin, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents 1, 2 & 3. 2. As agreed by both the parties this writ petition is disposed of at this stage. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main relief sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to prepare a scheme for regularization of the service of the petitioner and also to release the pay and allowances of the petitioner w.e.f.10.12.1991 to 18.11.1992. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that because of the latest decision of the Apex Court in Umma Devi's case, the petitioner is not seeking the original relief sought for in the present writ petition. But the petitioner is only seeking for a direction to the respondents to allow him to appear before the selection committee or DPC for appointment to the post of Matriculate Teacher and also for a further direction to the respondents to relax the maximum age limit of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Matriculate Teacher to the extend of period he rendered his services as substitute Matriculate Teacher. 3. The petitioner was appointed as a substitute Matriculate Teacher at Champhung Ramrin L.P. School (Ukhrul) under an order of the Addl. Director of Education (H), Govt.of Manipur dated 20th July, 1990. In pursuance of the said appointment order dated 20.7.1990 the petitioner joined his service as substitute Matriculate Teacher at Champhung Ramrin L.P. School (Ukhrul). It is also said that the period of his substitute appointment had been extended upto 31.8.94 under an order of the Govt. of Manipur dated 14.12.1994 issued by the Commissioner (Edn), Govt. of Manipur, a copy of which is available at Annexure-A/4 to the present writ petition. It is also said that the Director of Education (S), Govt.of Manipur under his letter dated 19th September, 1997 requested the Secretary (Education), Govt.of Manipur for obtaining the post facto approval of the Government of Manipur with concurrence of the D.P. to the extension of the services of the petitioner and others with effect from 1.10.1995 to 26.7.1997, a copy of which is available at Annexure-A/5 to the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously submits that from the said letter of the Director of Education (S), Govt. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously submits that from the said letter of the Director of Education (S), Govt. of Manipur dated 19.9.97 it is clear that the petitioner continued to serve as such, i.e. substitute Matriculate Teacher, upto 26.7.1997. He also submits that in fact the petitioner also served as substitute Matriculate Teacher upto 26.7.97 and that for the said continuous service of the petitioner direction to the competent authority may be issued for post facto extension of the terms of his substitute appointment. It is also said that the petitioner is not getting his pay and allowances from September, 1994 to 26.7.1997. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel of both the parties and also on perusal of the case of the petitioner in the present writ petition and documents annexed thereto and also the affidavit of the petitioner in support of the present writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Commissioner/Secretary (Edn./S), Govt.of Manipur to hold an enquiry as to whether the petitioner had rendered services as substitute Matriculate Teacher w.e.f. September, 1994 to 26.7.1997. Md. Jalall Uddin, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents submits that there is no order for extending the service of the petitioner from 1.10.95 to 26.7.1997. In this regard while holding the enquiry, the Secretary/Commissioner of Education(S) shall keep in view of the said letter of the Director of Education (S), Govt. of Manipur dated 19.9.1997. It is made clear that the Secretary/ Commissioner of Education(S) shall complete the whole exercise within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of this judgment and order. Further, the petitioner shall appear before the selection committee/ DPC for appointment to the post of Matriculate Teacher as and when the DPC/Selection Committee for such post is held. Respondents shall also consider for relaxation of the maximum age of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Matriculate Teacher to the extend of period he serves as substitute Matriculate Teacher. 5. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is allowed. No costs.