Research › Search › Judgment

Manipur High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 107 (MAN)

Sagolshem Rocky Singh v. State of Manipur

2022-06-13

M.V.MURALIDARAN

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and perused the records and Mr.Y.Ashang, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 3. This writ petition has been filed to seek a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2021. 4. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y. Ashang, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the second respondent issued an advertisement dated 6.8.2016 calling for applications to fill up 141 posts of Forest Guard under the Forest Department, Government of Manipur and pursuant to the said advertisement, the petitioner applied to the post of Forest Guard. Vide notification dated 23.12.2016, 255 candidates were declared to be successful at the recruitment of Forest Guard 2016 and 27 candidates were kept as waiting and the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No.6. Among 255 successful candidates, 248 were appointed as Forest Guard and joined services on their respective place of posting. As such, there is 7 posts of Forest Guard are still remain unfilled with another 2 vacant post that comes up after resignation of 2 appointed candidates, thus, vacant posts became 9. Though 9 posts of Forest Guard are still remain unfilled, the petitioner whose name appeared at Serial No.6 in the list of candidates kept as wait list has not been considered for appointment to the post of Forest Guard, thereby depriving the fundamental and legal rights of the petitioner. 6. Further case of the petitioner is that during the life span of waiting list, the Deputy Secretary (Forest and Environment), Government of Manipur issued an order dated 28.12.2017 conveying its concurrence for filling up 5 vacant posts from the waiting list recommended by the Forest Department. However, after due consideration, withdraw its approval under Serial No.3 i.e. for filling up the vacant posts from the waiting list candidates in public interest meaning thereby from Serial No.1 to 3 still approved and under Serial No.3 have been withdrawn. Thus, the waiting list has acted upon during its validity period. Therefore, there is no any further question of validity of panel prepared by the second respondent by the order dated 23.12.2016. Thus, the waiting list has acted upon during its validity period. Therefore, there is no any further question of validity of panel prepared by the second respondent by the order dated 23.12.2016. According to the petitioner, his case can be considered for appointment as Forest Guard pursuant to the advertisement dated 6.8.2016 issued by the second respondent and also in view of the notification dated 23.12.2016 and the order dated 15.12.2017. 7. According to the petitioner, similarly situated persons have earlier challenged the advertisement dated 6.8.2016 in W.P(C) Nos.982 of 2019, 121 of 2020, 120 of 2019, 456 of 2019 1167 of 2018 and by the order dated 6.6.2022 and this Court allowed the said writ petitions and the respondents are directed to appoint the petitioners therein to the post of Forest Guards in their respective category of reservation with effect from the date when the vacancies arose in terms of the order dated 15.12.2017 issued by the second respondent appointing 243 Forest Guards on regular basis. 8. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 10.09.2021 the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents praying for appointment as Forest Guard by taking into consideration the 9 posts of Forest Guard lying vacant. However, the said representation has not been considered by the respondents till date. Further, the similarly situated persons have filed several writ petitions wherein this Court directed the respondents therein to appoint them as Forest Guard. In view of the above, the respondents may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2021 in the light of the order passed in W.P(C) Nos.982 of 2019, 121 of 2020, 120 of 2019, 456 of 2019 1167 of 2018 dated 6.6.2022. 9. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the respondents are ready to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2021 within the stipulated period of time independently and not in the light of the order dated 06.06.2022 passed in W.P(C) Nos.982 of 2019 etc. batch as prayed for by the petitioner for the reason that the case of the petitioner stands on different footing. 10. batch as prayed for by the petitioner for the reason that the case of the petitioner stands on different footing. 10. Since the grievance of the petitioner and the claim made are pursuant to the advertisement dated 6.8.2016 issued by the second respondent and also in view of the notification dated 23.12.2016 and the order dated 15.12.2017, there is no wrong in seeking the petitioner to consider his representation in the light of the order in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019 etc. batch. Though in the prayer, the petitioner has not sought to consider his representation in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019 etc. batch, considering the claim made by the petitioner and similarly situated persons grievances have been directed to be considered in the light of the order in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019, this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court has got power to mould the relief to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2021 in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019. 11. The High Court has wide discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to take into consideration the subsequent events which happened during the pendency of the petition and accordingly, the relief can be moulded. The wide discretion of this Court cannot be restricted by extreme technicalities. 12. It is pertinent to mention that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, time and again, held that the High Court can mould the prayer taking note of the changed circumstances and suitably mould the relief in order to mete out justice in the case. 13. It is settled law that the High Court under high prerogative jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can mould the relief in just and same manner as it may require by the demands of the situation. 14. At this juncture, it is to be mentioned that in similar cases being W.P.(C) Nos.437 and 438 of 2022, this Court directed the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019. The petitioner is similarly situated as that of in W.P.(C) Nos.437 and 438 of 2022. At this juncture, it is to be mentioned that in similar cases being W.P.(C) Nos.437 and 438 of 2022, this Court directed the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019. The petitioner is similarly situated as that of in W.P.(C) Nos.437 and 438 of 2022. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to consider his representation in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019 and by considering the representation of the petitioner in the light of the order in W.P.(C) No.982 of 2019, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents. 15. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to the consider the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2021 in the light of the order dated 6.6.2022 passed in W.P(C) Nos.982 of 2019, 121 of 2020, 120 of 2019, 456 of 2019 1167 of 2018 and pass speaking orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.