54-57 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC (WP(C)) No.874 of 2025 with MC (WP(C)) 195 of 2023 with MC (WP(C)) No.215 of 2023 with WP(C) No.408 of 2023 Sajina … Petitioner -Versus- Nazima & 3 Ors … Respondents BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA O r d e r (ORAL) 2.12.2025 Present Mr.Anjan Prasad Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.R.K.Emily, learned Dy.GA on behalf of State respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and Mr.Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for respondent No.4. [2] The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 24.4.2023 issued by respondent No.3, terminating service of the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker. The impugned order was issued purportedly in compliance of order dated 30.01.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.853 of 2022 whereby termination of service of respondent No.4 as Anganwadi Worker was set aside and directed for reinstatement. In the impugned order dated 24.4.2023 it is stated that the petitioner was upgraded from the post of Anganwadi Helper to the post of Anganwadi Worker in the vacancy arising out of termination of service of respondent No.4 as Anganwadi Worker and since this Court has directed vide order dated 30.01.2023 to reinstate respondent No.4 (Sajina) no two persons can hold the same post. In the circumstance, service of petitioner (Nazima) as Anganwadi Worker was terminated. Vide order dated 26.5.2023 this Court stayed the impugned order dated 24.4.2023 and directed the petitioner to implead respondent No.4 who was originally not included as respondent. Thereafter, respondent No.4 has been impleaded as party. [3] Mr.Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for the respondnet draws attention of this Court to the additional affidavit dated 6.11.2024, filed by respondent No.4. Vide order dated 25.4.2023 issued by respondent No.3, service of respondent No.4 has been reinstated in compliance of order dated 30.1.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.853 of 2022. However, due to interim order dated 26.5.2023, respondent No.4 has not been given any posting and she is not allowed to discharge duty and she has not been given any place of posting. [4] Mr.Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that the respondent No.4 has no objection in disposing the writ petition provided proper posting has been given to respondent No.4. [5] Ms.R.K.Emily, learned Dy.GA submits that earlier writ petitioner was adjusted against the vacancy arising out of termination of service of respondent No.4 and upon reinstatement of service of respondent No.4, impugned order was issued. It is submitted that the writ petition may be disposed by giving liberty to the State respondents to give proper posting to the petitioner as well as to the respondent No.4 as per relevant rules. [6] In the circumstance and on consideration of subsequent development of reinstatement of respondent No.4, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the State respondents to give proper posting to both the petitioner and respondent No.4 in the rank of Anganwadi Workers. [7] In view of the above observation and direction, the impugned order dated 24.4.2023 become infructuous. The direction for giving posting be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. [8] Misc cases are closed. Interim order merged with the final order. Send a copy of this order to the Director, Social Welfare, Govt of Manipur, for information and necessary compliance. JUDGE Priyojit RAJKUMA R PRIYOJIT SINGH Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR PRIYOJIT SINGH Date: 2025.12.03 16:17:51 +05'30'