Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Manipur/
  4. 2024/
  5. December

Akoijam Bobby Singh and 9 Others vs. State of Manipur and 2 Others

Decided on 27 December 2024• Citation: WP(C)/540/2022• High Court of Manipur
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                                          Non-reportable            
                          IN  THE  HIGH  COURT    OF MANIPUR                        
                                        AT IMPHAL                                   
                                      WP(C)No.540 of 2022                           
                                            With                                    
                                    MC(WP(C))No.207 of 2023                         
                   1.   Akoijam Bobby Singh, aged about 49 years old,               
                        S/O A.K.Shyamkishore Singh, a permanent                     
                        Resident of Wangkhei Koijam Leikai, PO Imphal               
                        PS Porompat, Imphal East District,                          
                        Manipur, Imphal 795001.                                     
                   2.   Leimapokpam Bimol Singh, aged about 46 years old,           
                        S/o L.Mangi Singh, a permanent resident of                  
                        Athokpam Mayai Leikai, PO & PS Thoubal,                     
                        Thoubal District, Manipur, Thoubal 795138.                  
                   3.   Khomdram Anupama Devi, aged about 44 years old,             
                        W/O (Late) Kh.Suresh Singh, a permanent resident            
                        Of Kwakeithel Bazar, Opposite Kwakeithel Girls              
                        High School, PO & PS Imphal West District,                  
                        Manipur, Imphal 795001.                                     
                   4.   Thoujam Bandana Devi, aged about 44 years old,              
                        W/O M.Okendro Singh, a permanent resident of                
                        Heirangoithong Makha Mutum Leirak, PO & PS                  
                        Singjamei, Imphal West District, Manipur,                   
                        Imphal 795008.                                              
                   5.   Khangembam Mohen, aged about 48 years old,                  
                        S/o (Late) Kh.Gouri, a permanent resident of                
                        Khurkhul Awang Leikai, PO & PS Sekmai,                      
                        Imphal West District, Manipur, Imphal 795136.               
                   6.   Meitankeishangbam Jamuna Devi, aged about                   
                        47 years old, W/O Ng.Romson Singh, a                        
                        Permanent resident of Chingmeirong Mamang                   
                        Leikai, PO Porompat & PS Lamphel, Imphal East               
                        District, Manipur Imphal 795005.                            
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              1             

                   7.   Rajkumari Bhubaneshwori Devi, aged about                    
                        53 years old, w/o Thingom Mangi Singh, a                    
                        Permanent resident of Sagolband Tera Sapam                  
                        Leirak, PO & PS Lamphel, Imphal West                        
                        District, Manipur, Imphal 795004.                           
                   8.   Lamneichong Haokip, aged about 51 years old,                
                        W/O Sheikhohao Kipgen, a permanent resident                 
                        Of National Games Village, Langol, PO & PS                  
                        Lamphel, Imphal West District, Manipur,                     
                        Imphal 795004.                                              
                   9.   Hangzamoi Tonsing, aged about 49 years old,                 
                        s/o T.Thongzathang, a permanent resident of                 
                        Docras Road, Docras Veng, New Lamka, PO                     
                        & PS Churachandpur, Churachandpur District,                 
                        Manipur, Churachandpur 795128.                              
                   10.  Rakhi Golmei, aged about 44 years old, W/o                  
                        Dhanakumar P, a permanent resident of Uripok                
                        Tourangbam Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, Imphal                   
                        West District, Manipur, Imphal 795001.                      
                                                          … Petitioners             
                             -Versus-                                               
                   1.   The State of Manipur represented by the                     
                        Commissioner (Law) Government of Manipur,                   
                        Secretariat Block, PO & PS Imphal,                          
                        Imphal West District, Manipur 795001.                       
                   2.   The Manipur Public Service Commission                       
                        Represented by the Secretary, Manipur Public                
                        Service Commission, North AOC, PO & PS                      
                        Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur 795001.               
                   3.   Shri Asem Neelakumar Singh, aged about 48 years             
                        Old, s/o Asem Nimai Singh, resident of Pishum               
                        Bazar, PO Imphal & PS Singjamei, Imphal West                
                        District, Manipur 795001.                                   
                                                            Respondents             
                                                          …                         
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              2             

                                          BEFORE                                    
                                             A.GUNESHWAR  SHARMA                    
                          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE                                       
                        For the Petitioners :: Mr.H.S.Paonam, Sr.Advocate,          
                                           Mr.S.Gunabanta, Advocate,                
                        For the Respondents:: Mr.Y.Nirmolchand, Sr.Advocate,        
                                           Mr.L.Raju, Advocate,                     
                                           Mr.S.Niranjan, Government Advocate &     
                                           Ms.O.Momota, Sr. Advocate.               
                        Date of hearing :: 20.06.2024/17.12.2024                    
                        Date of order ::   27.12.2024                               
                                       O R D E R (CAV)                              
                   [1]       Heard Mr.H.S.Paonam, learned senior counsel assisted by
                   Mr.S.Gunabanta, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Y.Nirmolchand,
                   learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr.L.Raju, Mr.S.Niranjan, learned
                   Government Advocate, Ms.Momota, learned counsel for the respondents.
                   [2]       By the present writ petition, petitioners are challenging the
                   order dated 8.7.2022, interalia, on the ground that the same is done
                   against the order dated 1.6.2022 passed in WP(C) No.2 of 2019 with
                   WP(C) No.896 of 2018 and others.                                 
                   [3]       It is stated that filling up the post of Additional Public
                   Prosecutor by promotion under the relevant Recruitment Rules has been
                   a matter of concern since 2018 where the present petitioners who have
                   been functioning as Regular Assistant Public Prosecutor since 2016 have
                   claimed that they are eligible for promotion to the post of Additional Public
                   Prosecutor, however, State Government has been denying the claim of
                   the petitioners.                                                 
                   [4]       It is further stated that while the State Authorities are
                   making effort to appoint Addl PP by direct recruitment, the petitioners
                   along with others have approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.896 of
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              3             

                   2018 challenging the process for appointment and this Court was pleased
                   to pass interim order directing the State respondents not to fill up the post
                   of Addl PP by way of direct recruitment and the said order is extended
                   from time to time.                                               
                   [5]       It is stated that the State respondents have notified for
                   appointing Special Public Prosecutor by adjusting the post of Addl PP
                   thereby denying the right of the petitioners to be considered for promotion
                   to the post of Addl PP. Being aggrieved by such action the petitioners
                   have challenged the Notification dated 28.12.2019 by way filing WP(C)
                   No.5 of 2020 and this Court was pleased to pass interim order directing
                   the State respondents that the appointment of Special Public Prosecutor
                   by direct recruitment shall not be made against the vacant post of Addl.
                   P.P.                                                             
                   [6]       Further, it is stated that despite existence of the interim
                   order dated 6.1.2020 passed in WP(C) No.5 of 2020, the State     
                   respondents have issued the order dated 16.12.2020 allowing the private
                   respondent to function as Addl PP on extension of contract service.
                   Thereafter, the petitioner No.1 have filed Contempt Case (C) No.119 of
                   2021 for violation of the order dated 6.1.2020 passed in WP(C) No.5 of
                   2020.                                                            
                   [7]       It is stated that vide order dated 01.06.2022 passed by this
                   Court in batch of writ petitions being WP(C) Nos. 2/2019, 896/2018,
                   5/2020 and 895 of 2021 (filed by one Asstt PP namely Ch.Thoibisana
                   Devi), the same were disposed of all the writ petitions pertaining to the
                   promotions of the petitioners and others including seniority issues and it
                   was made clear that the promotional post to the post of Addl. PP (District)
                   -cum- Addl Government Advocate (District) in the office of Public
                   Prosecutor (District) should not be filled up by way of any other method
                   except in terms of the directions passed by this Court. It was also directed
                   that any promotion to the post of Addl. Public Prosecutor-cum Addl.
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              4             

                   Government Advocate (District) should be made in accordance with the
                   prevailing Recrutiment Rules when the vacancies would arise.     
                   [8]       It stated that there is a Rule called Law Department,  
                   Manipur Public Prosecutor (District)/ Additional Public Prosecutor-cum-
                   Additional Government Advocate Recruitment Rules, 1982, wherein at
                   Column 10 it is clearly stated that the Method of Recruitment is only by
                   way of Promotion filing which by direct recruitment, which would govern
                   for recruitment/promotion of Assistant Public Prosecutor to Additional
                   Public Prosecutor.                                               
                   [9]       It may be noted that State Government issued a Notification
                   dated 18.12.2019 publishing Additional Public Prosecutor-cum-Additional
                   Government Advocate (District) Recruitment Rules, 2019 in exercise of
                   power under Article 309 of the Constitution in supersession of all previous
                   rules in this regard. The qualification prescribed for the post is LLB degree,
                   with minimum 7 years of practice and included in the panel of advocates
                   maintained by the District Magistrate for appointment of Public Prosecutor
                   under Section 24 of CrPC. The method of recruitment is by promotion
                   from the post of Assistant Government Advocate-cum-Assistant Public
                   Prosecutor (District) with 5 years of regular service in the grade, failing
                   which by direct recruitment.                                     
                   [10]      It is the case of the petitioners who are Asst.GA-cum-Asst.
                   PP (D) that the post of Addl. PP-cum-Addl. GA (D) is a promotional post
                   from the post of the Asst.GA-cum-Asst. PP (D). If none is available for
                   promotion, appointment by direct recruitment is a second option. This
                   condition has been upheld by a decision of this Court in order dated
                   01.06.2022 in WP(C) No. 2 of 2019 and connected matters. In other
                   words, appointment by direct recruitment cannot be resorted at the first
                   instance without examining the promotional avenue. The appointment by
                   direct recruitment can be made under the failing clause, only when eligible
                   persons are not available amongst Asst.GA-cum-Asst. PP (D).      
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              5             

                   [11]      In the present writ petition, the challenge of regularising the
                   contractual service of the private respondent No.3 to the post of Addl. PP-
                   cum-Addl. GA (D) is on the limited ground that such a post cannot be
                   filled up by direct recruitment at the first instance. It is pointed out that
                   such an endeavour is in violation of the RR and the order dated  
                   01.06.2022 in WP(C) No. 2 of 2019 and connected matters. The     
                   petitioners are not questioning the qualifications of the private respondent
                   No.3 for appointment as Spl. PP (D).                             
                   [12]      This aspect was discussed during the course of hearing 
                   conducted on 16.04.2024. Mr. HS Paonam, learned senior counsel   
                   appearing on behalf of the petitioners limited the challenge to the
                   regularisation of the private respondent to the post of Addl. PP-cum-Addl.
                   GA (D) as contrary to RR and earlier order dated 01.06.2022. However,
                   the petitioners did not have any grievance if the respondent No.3 would
                   be regularised as Spl. PP. This Court observed that if the regularisation of
                   the respondent No.3 would be made as Spl. PP as done in the case of Shri
                   M. Raichand, the issue could be resolved without affecting the rights of
                   the parties. In the circumstances, learned GA was directed to take
                   instruction in this regard.                                      
                   [13]      In pursuance to the direction of this Court in order dated
                   16.04.2024, Deputy Secretary (Law), Govt. of Manipur filed an additional
                   affidavit dated 04.06.2024 stating that since the respondent No.3 was
                   regularised in the newly created post of Addl. PP-cum-Addl. GA (D) vide
                   orders dated 08.07.2024, it will not be possible to regularise him to the
                   post of Spl. PP.                                                 
                   [14]      In the circumstances, the matter was heard on this limited
                   point. It is an admitted fact that the respondent No.3 was initially engaged
                   as Spl. PP (D) on contract basis along with few other incumbents. Later
                   on, he was again engaged as Addl. PP-cum-Addl. GA (D) on contract basis
                   and posted at various courts. Subsequently, he was regularised as Addl.
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              6             

                   PP-cum-Addl. GA (D) vide impugned order dated 08.07.2022 against the
                   newly created post by another order dated 08.07.2022.            
                   [15]      It is an admitted fact that RR prescribes the post of Addl.
                   PP-cum-Addl. GA (D) as promotional post from the post of Asst. GA-cum-
                   Asst PP (D), failing which by way of direct recruitment. This stipulates that
                   promotion is the first option and in case of non-availability of eligible
                   candidates, resort can be made by direct recruitment by virtue of failing
                   clause. Whenever eligible candidates are available for promotion,
                   appointment by direct recruitment cannot be undertaken. This position
                   has also been settled by the direction of this Court in the order dated
                   01.06.2022 in WP(C) No. 2 of 2019, etc. On the other hand, the   
                   respondent No.3 is eligible for appointment as Spl. PP like Shri M.
                   Raichand who was appointed in the same impugned order dated      
                   08.07.2022.                                                      
                   [16]      This Court is at lost to understand the rigid stand of the
                   State respondents refusing to adjust the regularisation of Shri A.
                   Neelakumar Singh (respondent No.3 herein) as Spl. PP as proposed by
                   this Court vide order dated 16.04.2024 on the mutual suggestions of the
                   parties. Otherwise, the regularisation of the respondent No.3 as Addl. PP-
                   cum-Addl. GA (D) will not be able to sustain in view of the stipulation in
                   the RR and confirmation by this Court that the said post is promotional
                   post for the Asst. GA-cum-Asst. PP (D) at the first instance. Since the
                   petitioners who are Asst. GA-cum-Asst. PP (D) are eligible for promotion,
                   the regularisation of the respondent No.3 as Addl. PP-cum-Addl. GA (D)
                   will amount to resorting to direct recruit when eligible persons are
                   available for promotion.                                         
                   [17]      In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case,
                   this Court does not incline to quash the regularisation of the respondent
                   No.3 as Addl. PP-cum-Addl. GA (D). Accordingly, this Court modified the
                   regularisation of the respondent No.3 to the post of Addl. PP-cum-Addl.
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              7             

                   GA (D) as that to the post of Spl. PP wef 18.10.2022. If post of Spl. PP is
                   not available on the relevant date, State respondents may create 
                   supernumerary post of Spl. PP. With this direction and observation, the
                   writ petition is disposed of. Interim orders merge with final order and
                   misc. applications, if any, are disposed of.                     
                                                             JUDGE                  
                   FR/NFR                                                           
                   Priyojit                                                         
                   RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by                                     
                         RAJKUMAR                                                   
                   PRIYOJIT                                                         
                         PRIYOJIT SINGH                                             
                         Date: 2024.12.27                                           
                   SINGH                                                            
                         13:54:04 +05'30'                                           
                   WP(C) NO. 540 OF 2022                              8