BASANTAKUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed praying mainly for quashing the impugned order dated 04.11.2003 and the impugned order dated 17.04.2009, copies of which are Annexure -A/10 and Annexure-A/11 of the writ petition respectively. By issuing the impugned order dated 04.11.2003, the State Government sought to rescind the Recruitment Rules of 2003 for the post of Deputy Director in the Tribal Development and Backward Classes Department, Manipur, with immediate effect and to revive the earlier Recruitment Rules of 1985 in respect of the same post with immediate effect and until further orders. The second impugned order dated 17.04.2009 was issued by the State Government in supersession of the first impugned order dated 04.11.2003, purportedly in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, to rescind the Recruitment Rules of 2003 for the post of Deputy Director in the said department of Tribal Development and Backward Classes, Manipur, with immediate effect to revive the earlier Recruitment Rules of 1985 in respect of the same p6st with immediate effect and until further orders. Since the first impugned order dated 04.11.2003 has already been superseded by the second impugned order dated 17.04.2009, we dp not consider it necessary to consider the validity or otherwise in law in respect of the first impugned order and as such, the validity or otherwise of only the second impugned order dated 17.04.2009 shall be considered.

(2.) We have heard Mr. A. Romenkumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, Mr. Ch.Dhananjoy, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner No. 2, Mr. Th. Ibohal, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State Respondents, Mr. I. Lalitkumar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 4 and Mr. A. Mphendro, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 5.

(3.) One of the point raised by the learned Counsel of the Petitioners challenging the legality of the impugned order dated 17.04.2009 is that since it has been issued rescinding the Recruitment Rules of 2003 of the post of Deputy Director in the said department and reviving the Recruitment Rules of 1985 in respect of the same post without any consultation with the Manipur Public Service Commission, it cannot be given any legal effect and it is liable to be quashed.