LAWS(MANIP)-2016-3-15

THANGZADAM; HENZAMANG; S KAMTHANG; H VUNGZTHANG; H AMZATUAN; LALPEKTHANG; GINDAM TONSING Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR; DIRECTOR, EDUCATION (S), MANIPUR; ZONAL EDUCATION OFFICER; AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CHURACHANDPUR; CHAIRMAN, AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CCPUR

Decided On March 04, 2016
Thangzadam; Henzamang; S Kamthang; H Vungzthang; H Amzatuan; Lalpekthang; Gindam Tonsing Appellant
V/S
State Of Manipur; Director, Education (S), Manipur; Zonal Education Officer; Autonomous District Council Of Churachandpur; Chairman, Autonomous District Council Of Ccpur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Serto T. Kom, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr.A. Vasum, learned State counsel appearing for respondents.

(2.) Since the cause of action arose to each of the petitioners, altogether seven in number is the same, all these seven writ applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed as Teachers in different schools by the Manipur South Autonomous District Council, presently known as Autonomous District Council, Churachandpur sometimes in the year 1977 and onwards. In course of time, the petitioners were transferred to different schools, all Jr. Boys Primary Schools, from the schools where they had been initially appointed. Those schools in course of time were upgraded/amalgamated to Jr.High Schools. Consequently, services of the petitioners were placed under the control of District Education Officer/ Dy. Inspector of School. Upgradation/amalgamation of all these schools where petitioners had been posted on transfer got approval of upgradation/ amalgamation under the order of the Governor dated 20.02.1980, 31st January,1980 and 7th February,1980. In spite of order being there of the Governor, the authorities did raise objection over the payment of the salaries to the petitioners on the plea that they are not the Government Teachers. In that event all the petitioners did approach to the Chief Executive Officer of Autonomous District Council, Churachandpur seeking clarification by filing application as to whether they are being treated as Teachers of the schools being run by the Autonomous District Council. In response to that, Chief Executive Officer, Autonomous District Council, Churachandpur informed to the petitioners that since the petitioners along with staff of the Schools were amalgamated and upgraded by the Govt. of Manipur by different orders, they no longer are the teachers of the schools being run by the Autonomous District Council, Churachandpur. Subsequently, when some of the teachers similarly situated got retired, they filed writ application before this court making claim of the pensionary benefits. In those matters when advice was sought for from the Department, it did advise that the petitioners of those cases are entitled to have pensionary benefits. In spite of that when the petitioners were not paid salary by the Department of Education on the plea that petitioners' name have hot been included in the Computarised Personal Information System (for short 'CPIS') and even the authority of the District Education declined to enter the names of the petitioners in that system, the petitioners moved to this court for a direction to the authority to make payment of the salary. On account of the order being passed by this Court petitioners are being paid salary but this writ application has been filed for a direction to the authorities to treat the petitioners as teachers of the Govt. schools under the control of Education Department. Therefore, when the documents go to establish that the petitioners are the teachers of the Govt. schools, the authorities be directed to treat all these petitioners to be the teachers of the Govt. Schools.