T. MANZACHING Vs. THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ application questions the legality of the order passed by the Director, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj (RD & PR for short) Manipur at Annexure -A/18 dated 6.1.2014 terminating her service with retrospective effect from 31.3.2006.

(2.) THE petitioner was initially appointed as a substitute LDC(Dev) against a vacancy caused due to resignation of another substitute who had been appointed against the said vacancy caused because of promotion. She continued as a substitute LDC from 1986 and while continuing in service as a substitute LDC, she also contributed to GPF. It appears that Computerisation of Personal Information System (CPIS) of the Government employees known as MGEL was introduced by the Government of Manipur w.e.f. 1.4.2006 and name of the petitioner did not appear in the MGEL of the Department due to the nature of appointment. Therefore, she was served with the notice in Annexure -A/12 dated 12.8.2013 to explain as to why her service should not be terminated due to her illegal appointment. The petitioner submitted her reply but ultimately the order of termination was passed with retrospective effect from 31.3.2006 by order of the Director(RD & PR) under Annexure -A/18.

(3.) MR . H. Raghumani, learned State counsel, referring to the counter affidavit, submitted that the initial appointment of the petitioner in the year, 1986 by the Deputy Commissioner, Churachandpur was without any authority and therefore such appointment was illegal. It was further submitted on behalf of the State that even though such illegal appointment had been made, the petitioner continued in service as a substitute LDC till July, 2006 as per the Attendance record maintained in the office and her pay and allowances were paid till March, 2006. Thereafter, payment of salary was discontinued. In the meantime, MGEL was introduced and name of the petitioner did not appear in the list of employees working in the department because of the nature of her employment. The MGEL was made effective from 1.4.2006 and since the name of the petitioner did not appear in the list of employees working in the department, her service was terminated w.e.f. 31.3.2006.