Kh. Nobin Singh, J - (1.) Heard Shri Ng. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Th. Sobhana, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. None is present for the other respondents.
(2.) By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the contract service of the petitioner as Senior Scientific Assistant in the Manipur Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") in the same manner as has been done in respect of the cases of 35 (thirty five) contract employees.
(3.) [3.1] According to the petitioner, she being an M.Sc. (Zoology), was appointed as Senior Scientific Assistant on contract basis on payment of a consolidated pay of Rs. 3,000/- per month, along with one Ch. Landhoni Devi who was appointed as Laboratory Assistant, vide order dated 09-03-1999 issued by the Member Secretary of the Board. While the petitioner was working as Senior Scientific Assistant on contract basis, she was, on the recommendation of a Screening Committee, given regular appointment to the said post vide order dated 01-04-2003 issued by the Chairman of the Board. However, the petitioner was not paid her monthly salary in the pay scale attached to the said post of Senior Scientific Assistant and on the termination of the service of one Lanshairung Golmei, a regular SSA, the petitioner expected that she would be paid her monthly salary in the pay scale of the Senior Scientific Assistant but when the same was not done by the authority concerned, she submitted her representation dated 20-10-2006 to the Chairman of the Board. Without considering her representation, the petitioner was asked by the Chairman of the Board to sign and submit a prescribed format titled "Standard Agreement Format for Engagement on Contract Basis" vide Office Memorandum dated 13- 11-2006 of the Member Secretary, to which the petitioner submitted another representation dated 16-11-2006 to him stating therein that since she had been appointed on regular basis, she was not required to sign such a prescribed format. [3.2] Thereafter, the Chairman of the Board served a Show Cause Notice dated 06-12-2006 upon the petitioner on 08-12-2006 directing her to sign the said prescribed format, failing which necessary disciplinary actions be taken against her. Although the petitioner had shown her cause, she filed a writ petition being W.P (C) No.1138 of 2006, along with an application, challenging the OM dated 13-11-2006 wherein the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 14-12-2006 was pleased to pass an interim order in the said application directing the respondents therein not to take any disciplinary action against her and also not to subject her to execute the said prescribed format until further order. Two days later i.e. on 16-12-2006 the petitioner was served with a copy of the order dated 13-12-2006 by which her contract service was terminated and being aggrieved by it, she approached the Hon'ble High Court by way of a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.1186 of 2006 wherein the termination order dated 13-12-2006 was stayed. On 23-05-2007 both the said writ petitions came to be dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court vide its common judgment and order, relevant directions of the Hon'ble High Court are reproduced herein below: "(iii) Further, in the facts and circumstances, it will not be proper and just not to allow the petitioner to work as Sr. Scientific Assistant on contract basis again, since the petitioner has already submitted the required Format after putting her signature; (iv) The concerned respondents shall have to pass an appropriate order allowing her to serve as Senior Scientific Assistant further on contract basis as done in the case of other persons serving in the office of the Board on contract basis so long as the concerned post is not filled up on regular basis or till her service is required." [3.3] Being aggrieved by the said common judgment and order dated 23-05-2007, two writ appeals being W.A. No. 43 of 2007 and W.A. No.44 of 2007 came to be preferred and during the pendency of the said writ appeals, the petitioner was taken back into service on contract basis vide order dated 07-06-2008 issued by the Member Secretary. On 27-08-2008 although the Hon'ble High Court found the termination order to be issued backdated, it did not take any action on unconditional apology being tendered by the officers and disposed of the said appeals directing the Board to pay the petitioner her back wages for the period from 13-12-2006 to 24-03- 2008. But when the Board failed to pay her back wages as directed by this court, she submitted a representation dated 03-11-2008 and since no action was taken by the Board, the petitioner was compelled to file a contempt case being Cont. Case (C) No.170 of 2008. Instead of complying with the earlier court's order, the Member Secretary of the Board issued an order dated 29-01-2009 ordering that the service of the petitioner should stand discontinued which prompted the petitioner to file another writ petition being W.P.(C) No.121 of 2009 and the same is still pending for disposal by this court. However, the said termination order dated 29-01-2009 was stayed by the Hon'ble High Court vide its interim order passed on 27-02-2009 which was later extended from time to time vide various orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court, the last being the order dated 26-10-2016 which extended it until further. [3.4] Recently, the petitioner came to know that the services of all 35 (thirty five) contract employees of the Board who are similarly situated with the petitioner, have been given regular appointment vide order dated 17-11-2016 issued by the Member Secretary of the Board including one Ch. Landhoni Devi who was appointed along with the petitioner on the same day on 09-03-1999 leaving the petitioner behind. Being aggrieved by such action of the Board, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 28-12-2016 requesting the Commissioner (Forest & Environment), Government of Manipur and the Member Secretary, Manipur Pollution Control Board which is still pending for consideration by them. Having no alternative, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on the inter-alia grounds that the non-regularisation of the petitioner as Senior Scientific Assistant, while all others similarly situated have been regularised, is blatantly arbitrary, malafide, vindictive being violatve of the provisions of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.;