SHAMURAILATPAM SANJOY SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri N. Ibotombi, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri A. Rommel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri K. Jagat, learned Govt. Advocate and Shri Y. Nirmolchand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for consideration of his case for regular appointment to the post of Data Assistant (Computer) in terms of the conditions provided in the relevant Recruitment Rules within a stipulated period. Ccording to the petitioner, he was appointed as Data Assistant (Computer) on contract basis on consolidated pay of Rs. 7,200/ - per month for a period of 1 (one) year vide order dated 28 -05 -2014 and his contract appointment was extended thereafter.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 3, it is not denied that the petitioner was appointed as Data Assistant (Computer) on contract basis and the only stand taken by the respondent No. 3 is that it has not initiated any process nor has it proceeded for direct recruitment for the posts of Data Assistant (Computer), LDA or Grade -IV and that the petitioners' case for absorption shall be considered along with similarly situated cases strictly in terms of the existing relevant Recruitment Rules provided he is eligible for appointment to the post of Data Assistant (Computer). An affidavit on behalf of the respondent No. 1 also has been filed wherein it is stated that since the relief sought for by the petitioner is against the respondents No. 2 and 3 being autonomous institutions, the respondent No. 1, the State Government is neither a necessary party nor a proper party in the writ petition and accordingly, it is prayed that the name of the respondent No. 1 be deleted from the array of parties.