NG. MAIMU SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.M. Hemchandra Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.H. Debendra Singh, learned State counsel for state respondents and Mr.A. Mohendro Singh, learned counsel appearing for private respondents.

(2.) BY filing this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioner seeks to challenge the constitutional validity of the Rules framed on 14.2.1994 called 'The Agriculture/Horticulture and Soil Conservation Department, Manipur [Additional Directors of Agriculture/Horticulture & Soil Conservation and other posts with an identical scale of pay and similar duties (known as the cadre of Additional Director)], Recruitment Rules,1994' (for short hereinafter called for brevity ­"The Rules 1994") and also the promotion order of the respondent no.4 dated 2.9.2003.

(3.) THE stand of the respondent is that firstly the writ petitioner is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and lashes because it seeks to challenge the Rules of 1994 almost after 15 years of its enactment. Secondly this is not a case, where promotional avenues have not provided to the petitioner but on the other hand and even according to him, it would go to show that the writ petitioner did enjoy the promotional benefits thrice in his carrier from the date of his joining till date. Thirdly there are many dissimilarities between the post held by the writ petitioner and the one held by the respondent No.4 and hence due to these dissimilarities, the promotional avenue for the post in question is confined to one cadre held by Respondent No.4 excluding other. In other words, it is the case of Respondent No.4 that both the posts in question are not at par with each other for their consideration for the posts and hence only those who are in the channel of Respondent No.4 can be considered for the next promotion to the post of Joint Director.