Manipur High Court
Khaidem Suchitra Chanu vs State Of Manipur & 2 Ors on 14 July, 2026
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
2026:MNHC:134 REPORTABLE
Item no. 89
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 842 of 2023
Khaidem Suchitra Chanu
... Petitioner
- Versus -
State of Manipur & 2 Ors.
... Respondents
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
ORDER
14.07.2026
(O R A L)
[1] Heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Y.
Jinita, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. L. Monomala, learned Government
Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents.
[2] The petitioner, Ms. Khaidem Suchitra Chanu, was initially
appointed as Laboratory Attendant in Biramangol College, Sawombung by the
Secretary, Governing Body, Biramangol College, Sawombung vide order dated
30.1.2009. Later on, she was promoted to the post of LDC vide order dated
31.7.2013. While serving in the post of LDC, she was kept under suspension by
order dated 30.08.2014 passed by the Secretary, Biramamgol College,
Sawombung, Manipur. She submitted representation dated 27.1.2022 to the
Commissioner, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Manipur, for
revocation of her suspension order and consider her case for absorption in the
newly converted Government College.
[3] It may be stated that Biramangol College, Sawombung was
converted to full-fledged Government College vide order dated 28.06.2018. Copy
of the order dated 28.06.2018 is not annexed. However, Mr. N. Ibotombi , learned
sr. counsel for the petitioner produces a copy of the order dated 28.06.2018
during the course of hearing and the same is taken on record. It may be
mentioned that name of petitioner was recommended for absorption in the
Page 1 of 9
proceedings of Verifying Committee, constituted by the Government, in its
proceedings dated 13.12.2022. Vide order dated 07.03.2022 passed by this Court
in WP(C) No. 92 of 2022, State respondents were directed to consider the
representation dated 27.1.2022 submitted by the petitioner. In pursuance to the
direction of this Court, the impugned order dated 02.05.2023 was issued by the
Commissioner, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Manipur rejecting
the representation submitted by the petitioner on the ground that her suspension
order was issued by the Governing Body and State Government has no role in
passing any order and since her suspension order has not been revoked by the
Governing Body, her request for absorption in the newly converted Governing
Body cannot be considered. The scan copy of order dated 28.06.2018 mentioned
above is reproduced below:
Page 2 of 9
[4] Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by way of
the present writ petition, inter-alia on the ground that prolonged suspension of
petitioner without any extension is illegal. It is submitted that such act is in
violation of Rule 10 Sub Rule (6) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, mandating a
suspension order is to be reviewed or extended before expiry of 90 days.
Admittedly, in the present case, suspension order dated 30.08.2024 has no t beenPage 3 of 9
extended nor reviewed till date by the authority and the same is in violation of
principles laid down under Rule 10 Sub Rule (6) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and
the scan copy of the relevant portions are reproduced below:
Page 4 of 9
[5] It is submitted that service of petitioner is regulated by Manipur
Education Code and Manipur Aided College Employees (Service) Rules, 1974. In
Section-II regarding conduct and disciplinary proceedings, ‘para 3’ says that an
employee may be placed under suspension pending inquiry, however, period of
suspension is not provided in Manipur Education Code, 1982 and hence,
principles of Rule 10 Sub Rule 6 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 will be applicable. The
scan copy of relevant portions of the aforesaid rules are reproduced below:
Page 5 of 9
Page 6 of 9
[6] Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner also
referred to a decision of this Court in the case of “Aldrin Nahakpam Vs. StatePage 7 of 9
of Manipur” in WP(C) No. 104 of 2024. In this case, Aldrin Nahakpam was
an Assistant Professor in Biramangol College and his name was also
recommended for absorption by the Verifying Committee along with the
petitioner in the present case, i.e. Kh. Suchitra Devi. However, service of Mr.
Aldrin Nahakpam was terminated and he was not considered for absorption, this
Court set aside the termination order being in violation of Manipur Education
Code and same being passed without giving any opportunity to the employee
and direction was issued to consider for absorption of the petitioner therein.
[7] Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel submits that case of
petitioner herein, is better than the case of Aldrin Nahakpam. She was only kept
under suspension for a prolonged time without any extension and no termination
order issued against her.
[8] It is submitted that in terms of order for taking over of Biramangol
College, the State respondent has taken up all assets, liabilities and powers of
Aided Colleges as recorded in ‘para 3’ of order dated 28.06.2018 and as such,
the impugned order stating that State Government has no role to consider
revocation of suspension and absorb the petitioner, is without any basis. It is
further submitted that writ petition may be allowed and respondents may be
directed to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption in the newly
converted College as recommended by the Verification Committee.
[9] On the other hand, Ms. Monomala, learned Government Advocate
refers to the contents of counter affidavit especially, paras 3, 4 & 9 to the point
that suspension order was issued by the Governing Body of Biramangol College,
Sawombung; suspension order has not been revoked by the issuing authority,
i.e. Governing Body; and State Government has no role. It is submitted that
petition be dismissed being devoid of merit.
[10] This Court has considered the materials on record and
submissions made at the Bar. Service of petitioner is regulated by Manipur
Education Code and even though suspension is provided, period of suspension
is not provided in the Code. It will be fruitful to rely on the principles laid down
in Rule 10 Sub Rule 6 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 which provided that suspension
order should be reviewed before expiry of 90 days and if the same is not done,Page 8 of 9
the suspension order, automatically expires. Since State Government has taken
over Aided College, i.e. Biramangol College, Sawombung, all rights, liabilities
and assets, etc. of the erstwhile Aided College has been vested to the State
Government and State Government has every right to pass appropriate order in
terms of relevant Rules. Admittedly suspension order dated 30.08.2014 has not
been revoked or extended by any subsequent order and same shall lapse on
expiry of 90 days, by applying principles of Rule 10 Sub Rule 6 of CCS (CCA)
Rules, 1965. When Manipur Education Code is silent on the period of suspension
pending enquiry, an employee cannot be placed under suspension for an
indefinite period that too without any review. In such circumstances, the
principles laid down in Rule 10 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 would be applicable. In
the present case, no departmental proceeding has been initiated against the
petitioner. In the circumstances, the suspension order dated 30.08.2014 cannot
be sustained. Since name of the petitioner has already been considered and
recommended by the Verifying Committee in its proceedings dated 30.12.2022,
respondents are directed to consider her case for absorption in the newly
converted Government College, i.e. Biramangol College, keeping in mind that Mr.
Aldrin Nahakpam, whose service was terminated has already been absorbed by
the Government.
[11] With this observation and direction, the present writ petition
being WP(C) No. 842 of 2023 is allowed and disposed of.
[12] Consideration of the case of petitioner for absorption to
Biramangol College, Sawombung be completed within a period of 2(two) months’
from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
[13] Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the
Administrative Secretary, Higher & Technical Education, Government of Manipur
for doing the needful.
Oinam Digitally signed by JUDGE
Oinam Thoiba Meitei
Thoiba Date: 2026.07.18
Meitei 17:47:12 +05'30'
Priyojit & Thoiba
Page 9 of 9
