- (1.) Manilal Singh appears in person and files his affidavit, inter alia, stating that an order has been passed on the 19th August, 1992, declaring that the petitioner is to retire from service on 31.8.1992 [A.N.] on superannuation as Joint Secretary. The petitioner points out that in view of the interim order issued by this Court, he must be treated to be functioning as Secretary, Manipur Legislative Assembly and he cannot be treated as the Joint Secretary. This order, therefore, appears to be prima facie in violation of this Court's order. We, in the circumstances, stay the operation of the aforesaid order bearing No. 5/1/76 (Accts)(5)/3 Pt. dated 19th August, 1992.
(2.) Manilal Singh also states that Shri R.K. Chinglehsana Singh, Deputy Secretary [F], Manipur Legislative Assembly has not carried out the directions of this Court and has not prepared the bills. Mr. Bhattacharya states that he represents Shri R.K. Chinglensana Singh and claims that, as instructed by Shri Singh, necessary payments are already sanctioned to the petitioner. The petitioner denies it.
(3.) In our order dated August 4, 1992, we had directed the Chief Secretary, State of Manipur, to.see that the directions issued by this Court in regard to the payment of the arrears of the petitioner is promptly obeyed. The Chief Secretary, Shri H.V. Goswami is represented through counsel who submits that the Chief Secretary had written a letter to the Private Secretary to the Speaker of the Manipur Legislative Assembly on August 17, 1992, making the necessary request. A copy of that letter is also produced. Learned counsel for the Chief Secretary has placed before us a copy of a note setting out the cause of action permissible to the Chief Secretary in relation to the issue and as to his limitations in dealing with what he considered to be a matter pertaining to the legislative organ of the State. Learned counsel placed before us this note in her endeavour to indicate the limitations on the powers of Chief Secretary in the matter. The note indicates that it was contemplated to make the petitioner, Manilal Singh, himself the Drawing and Disbursing Officer so that the impasse is got over. Page 1 of the note contains the following: "The only power which can be exercised by the State Government is to allot/transfer the D.D.O. code No. of Assembly Secretariat to Shri I. Manilal Singh, Secretary (LA), till the end of September, 1.992, so as to enable him to prepare and encash his own pay and . allowances etc. Bills as done earlier by F.D. vipe p. 10/cf." But this, apparently, was rendered ineffective by what the note itself indicates at page 2: "An instruction was issued to Treasury copy of which was placed at page 10/cf. to enable Shri Manilal to function as D.D.O. but this has to be superseded by the instruction copy at page 9/cf. as the Speaker desires that Deputy Secretary (F) should be the D.D.O..." ;