LAWS(MANIP)-2019-3-17

W. NAOBI DEVI Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

Decided On March 06, 2019
W. Naobi Devi Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MANIPUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Roselyn, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs. Sundari, learned G.A. appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

(2.) The husband of the petitioner late R.K. Modhusudan Singh, Sagolband Bijoygobinda, P.O. Imphal, P.S. Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur was appointed on contract basis as Lecturer, Art Education by an Order dated 16.11.2002 along with 2 (two) others. By the same Order, the husband of the petitioner was posted at Tamei, DIET. In the meantime, the husband of the petitioner died on 06.10.2010. The Government on the basis of State Cabinet decision took a policy for creation of certain posts and 271 contract employees of different categories of posts were regularized by an Order dated 24.12.2011. In the Order dated 24.12.2011, the 2 (two) persons, who were appointed along with the petitioner's late husband by the Order dated 16.11.2002, were also regularized as Lecturer and their names appear at Serial No. 98 and 99. The petitioner, therefore, seeking parity filed an application praying for retrospective regularization in respect of her late husband R.K. Modhusudan Singh before the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by separate representations both dated 18.01.2016. As the representation filed by the petitioner was not considered, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present writ petition with the following prayers.

(3.) Mrs. Sundari, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents submits that the creation of posts for which 271 contract employees were regularized by the Order dated 24.12.2011 was done after the Government had created posts which was after the husband of the petitioner died. She, therefore, submits that the case of the petitioner's late husband is not at par with the case of the other 2 (two) persons who were also appointed with the petitioner petitioner's late husband as contract Lecturer, Art Education by the Order dated 16.11.2002. She, therefore, submits that the petitioner has no legal right to seek for retrospective regularization in respect of her late husband.