HC stays MU’s appointment
|
By Our Staff Reporter
IMPHAL, Feb 26 : A Division Bench of the High Court of Manipur issued an interim order on February 25, 2026 staying issue of appointment orders to candidates who have been declared successful in the recruitment process to 78 Group-B and Group-C posts in Manipur University.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M Sundar and Justice A Bimol passed the order in connection with a WP(C) filed by Wangkhem Ranjan and Sukham Bidyananda as petitioners against Manipur University represented by Registrar, Ministry of Education, Government of India through Secretary, Department of Higher Education and University Grants Commission through Chairman.
According to the writ petition, Manipur University issued an advertisement dated 13/05/2025 inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment to 78 posts (Group – B and Group – C).
Keisham Kishan, the petitioners’ counsel submitted that the uploaded advertisement was issued pursuant to cadre Recruitment Rules of Non-Teaching Posts, 2024 (‘CRR Rules’ for convenience) but CRR Rules are liable to be struck down on the ground that it does not have the approval of the Visitor which is the President of India.
CRR has been made by the executive council of Manipur University under Section 31(1)(p) of the Statutes but Section 31 of the Statutes does not have any sub-Section or Sub-Clause, the Counsel submitted.
CRR also says that it is pursuant to Ordinance D-14 which was made vide resolution No 14/40 adopted by the executive council of Manipur University at a meeting held on December 30, 2024.
After hearing the submission of the petitioners’ counsel, the Division Bench issued notice to the respondents.
Senior counsel Anjan Prasad Sahu accepted notice for Manipur University represented by Registrar.
During the hearing, the Court asked the senior counsel the rule making power of the executive council of Manipur University and also the reason for making reference to Section 31(1)(p) of the Statutes when there is no such provision.
The Senior counsel submitted that Section 31(1)(p) may be a reference to Section 31(1)(p) of the Manipur University Act, 2005.
The senior counsel also submitted that though results of the recruitment process have been published, no appointment orders have been issued.
The Court, after hearing the petitioners’ counsel and the counsels representing the respondents, observed that prima facie case has been made out qua campaign against the CRR and the balance of convenience is in favour of staying issue of appointment orders.
The Court then passed an interim order staying the issue of appointment orders to candidates who have been declared successful.
The interim stay will operate till the next listing, mentioned the order.
The Court listed March 10, 2026 for further hearing of the case.
IMPHAL, Feb 26 : A Division Bench of the High Court of Manipur issued an interim order on February 25, 2026 staying issue of appointment orders to candidates who have been declared successful in the recruitment process to 78 Group-B and Group-C posts in Manipur University.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M Sundar and Justice A Bimol passed the order in connection with a WP(C) filed by Wangkhem Ranjan and Sukham Bidyananda as petitioners against Manipur University represented by Registrar, Ministry of Education, Government of India through Secretary, Department of Higher Education and University Grants Commission through Chairman.
According to the writ petition, Manipur University issued an advertisement dated 13/05/2025 inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment to 78 posts (Group – B and Group – C).
Keisham Kishan, the petitioners’ counsel submitted that the uploaded advertisement was issued pursuant to cadre Recruitment Rules of Non-Teaching Posts, 2024 (‘CRR Rules’ for convenience) but CRR Rules are liable to be struck down on the ground that it does not have the approval of the Visitor which is the President of India.
CRR has been made by the executive council of Manipur University under Section 31(1)(p) of the Statutes but Section 31 of the Statutes does not have any sub-Section or Sub-Clause, the Counsel submitted.
CRR also says that it is pursuant to Ordinance D-14 which was made vide resolution No 14/40 adopted by the executive council of Manipur University at a meeting held on December 30, 2024.
After hearing the submission of the petitioners’ counsel, the Division Bench issued notice to the respondents.
Senior counsel Anjan Prasad Sahu accepted notice for Manipur University represented by Registrar.
During the hearing, the Court asked the senior counsel the rule making power of the executive council of Manipur University and also the reason for making reference to Section 31(1)(p) of the Statutes when there is no such provision.
The Senior counsel submitted that Section 31(1)(p) may be a reference to Section 31(1)(p) of the Manipur University Act, 2005.
The senior counsel also submitted that though results of the recruitment process have been published, no appointment orders have been issued.
The Court, after hearing the petitioners’ counsel and the counsels representing the respondents, observed that prima facie case has been made out qua campaign against the CRR and the balance of convenience is in favour of staying issue of appointment orders.
The Court then passed an interim order staying the issue of appointment orders to candidates who have been declared successful.
The interim stay will operate till the next listing, mentioned the order.
The Court listed March 10, 2026 for further hearing of the case.