Page 1 Item Nos. 22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 808 of 2025 Yengkhom Ashalata Devi & 35 Ors …Petitioner/s Vrs. State of Manipur & 2 Ors …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 09.02.2026 [1] Heard Mr. HS. Paonam, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. Lekhakumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners; Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appearing for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. R.K. Deepak, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mrs. L. Monica, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3. [2] It is the case of the petitioners that all the petitioners were appointed as Field Assistant (FA) in the Agriculture Department by an order dated 07.01.2022 and that they all possesses the Educational Qualification of B.Sc/M.Sc (Agri/Horti). As all the petitioners has been appointed on 07.01.2022 and they have rendered more than 3 years regular service and as such, they are eligible and qualified to be considered for promotion to the higher post of Assistant Agriculture Officer/Equivalent in the Agriculture Department. Lucy Gurum ayum Digitally signed by Lucy Gurumayum Date: 2026.02.09 15:39:57 +05'30' Page 2 [3] It is also the case of the petitioners that under the Department of Agriculture, Manipur Assistant Agriculture Officer and other post with identical scale of pay and similar duties (this will be known as the cadre of Assistant Agriculture Officer) Recruitment Rules, 2014 it is inter alia provided that Field Assistant (FA)/Village Extension Worker (VEW) or its equivalent possessing degree in B.Sc (Agri/Horti) from a recognized university with 3(three) years regular service in the grade are eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer/ Equivalent. [4] Mr. HS. Paonam, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Director of Agriculture, Manipur wrote a letter dated 20.05.2025 to the Principal Secretary (Agriculture), Government of Manipur stating inter alia that as many as 41 posts of AAO ear marked for promotion quota are lying vacant and as such, a proposal was made to convey the administrative approval for filling up of the said 41 posts of AAO/Equivalent by promotion. [5] Drawing the attention of this Court at paragraph 3 of the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Director (Agriculture), Government of Manipur (R-2) and also at paragraph 4 & 5 of the Page 3 affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Administrative Department (R-1), it has been submitted by the learned Sr. counsel that the authorities have clearly stated that after obtaining the view/observation of the Department of Personnel, Government of Manipur, necessary process is under way for taking further action for filling up the said 41 posts ear marked for promotion quota as per the relevant recruitment rules, and as advised by the Department of Personnel. [6] The learned Sr. counsel submitted that in view of the undisputed facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the clear cut statement made by the respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition, the present writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondents to filled up the aforesaid 41 vacant posts of AAO/Equivalent by promotion strictly in terms of the relevant recruitment rules within a stipulated period. [7] Mrs. L. Monomala, learned GA appearing for the respondent nos. 1 & 2 fairly submitted that the present writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the statement made by the respondent nos. 1 & 2 in their affidavit-in-opposition, however, the learned GA submitted that adequate time to complete the process Page 4 for filling up of the said 41 vacant posts may be given to the respondents. [8] Mr. R.K. Deepak, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3 also fairly submitted that MPSC will take up necessary steps for considering the proposal submitted by the respondent nos. 1 & 2 for sending recommendation to filled up the aforesaid 41 posts as early as possible and that in any case the whole process will be completed within a period of two months from the date receipt of the proposal sent by the respondent nos. 1 & 2. [9] Taking into consideration the undisputed facts and circumstances of the present case and the submission advance by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also on careful consideration of the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered view that it will be in the interest of justice to issue the following directions. (i) The respondent nos. 1 & 2 are hereby directed to complete the process for filling up aforesaid 41 vacant posts of AAO/Equivalent strictly in terms of the applicable rules and to sent the proposal for filling up the said post to Page 5 the MPSC within a period of two months from today. (ii) The respondent no.3 (MPSC) is hereby directed to complete the process of selection and to sent its recommendation as early as possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of the proposal sent by the respondent nos. 1 & 2. (iii) The respondent nos. 1 & 2 are further directed to issue necessary appointment order of the recommended candidates sent by the respondent no. 3 as early as possible but not later than one month from the receipt of the proposal or recommendation sent by the MPSC. [10] With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of. [11] There will be no cost. JUDGE Lucy