PHIJAM SHYAMCHAND SINGH v. STATE OF MANIPUR AND 5 OTHERS
Court: High Court of Manipur
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Manipur judgment dated 2024-09-24. PHIJAM SHYAMCHAND SINGH v. STATE OF MANIPUR AND 5 OTHERS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Item No. 83 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 484 of 2023 Phijam Shyamchand Singh ….. Petitioner/s - Versus – State of Manipur & 5 Ors. .... Respondent/s BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 24. 09. 2024 [1] Present Mr. RK. Deepak, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Dennis Tokpam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G. A. on behalf of Mrs. Ch. Sundari, learned G. A. for the State respondent, Mr. K. Albert, learned counsel for the LDA and Mr. K. Roshan, learned counsel for respondent No. 6. [2] By the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the deputation order dated 05. 08. 2020 and the corrigendum dated 06. 08. 2020 whereby private respondent was appointed on deputation as Superintending Engineer of Engineering Wing, Education (S) Department, Manipur. The petitioner approached by way of writ of quo warranto. [3] Mr. K. Roshan, learned counsel for the private respondent, submits that vide order dated 05. 08.
2020, the State Government has reverted the petitioner to the parent cadre in LDA and by the subsequent event, the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the same may be closed. [4] Mr. RK. Deepak, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the deputation of the petitioner was done in gross violation of several rules and also the private respondent was not eligible for appointment as Superintending Engineer of Engineering Wing, Education (S), Government of Manipur and later on was promoted as Chief Engineer. It is submitted that the private respondent should refund all the monitory benefit obtained out of illegal deputation and the matter may be heard on merit. [5] This Court is of the opinion that when the cause of writ petition does not survive, no indulgence of academic importance is called for and if the petitioner has any grievance apart from the order of deputation, he may approach appropriate forum. [6] With this observation, writ petition is closed.
JUDGE Kh. Joshua Maring Digitally signed by KH. KH. JOSHUA JOSHUA MARING Date: 2024. 09. 26 MARING 10:46:55 +05'30'
Source: High Court of Manipur. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.