AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ahanthem Bimol Singh, J
Heard Mr. M. Devananda, learned Addl. AG assisted by Ms. Langlenthoibi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ningtamba, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
At the outset, Mr. M. Devananda, learned Addl. AG submitted that the only ground for filing this review petition is that at the time of passing the impugned order dated 16-12-2021 in WP(C) No. 586 of 2021, the State respondents failed to point out the existence of the Recruitment Rules called the Department of Education (U), Manipur (Lecturers of Government Colleges except Law College, D.M. College of Teachers’ Education and Government College of Technology) Recruitment Rules, 2002. The learned Addl. AG further submitted that the present review petition can be disposed of by making a simple observation that the State authorities may be given liberty to raise this issue in further proceedings involving the question of promotion of the Teachers of Higher Secondary Schools to the post of Assistant Professors in the Hindi Teachers’ Training College.
On the other hand, Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that so far as the petitioners are concerned, the order impugned herein has been already complied with by the Government and they have already been promoted to the said post and thereafter, they have retired from service. However, the learned senior counsel fairly submitted that he has no objection in making any observation with regard to the issue of raising the existence of the said Recruitment Rules of 2002 in the further proceeding.
Taking into consideration the rival submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the record, this court is of the considered view that there is no ground whatsoever for reviewing the impugned order dated 16-12-2021 passed by this court in WP(C) No. 586 of 2021 and as such, this court declined to do so. However, liberty is given to the respondents to raise the issue of existence of the aforesaid Recruitment Rules of 2002 in further proceedings, if so advised.
With the aforesaid observation, the present petition is hereby closed.