Imphal, September 20 2017: Bijay Prasad Sahu, former Legal Advisor/ Defense Counsel of Regional Institute of Medical Sciences today filed a case against the Union of India and others before the High Court of Manipur, for passing a stay order which terminated him from the post of RIMS Legal Advisor.
The complaint case was filed before the High Court of Manipur by Bijay Prasad Sahu of Mantripukhri, through his counsel .
The complaint case was listed before the Acting Chief Justice N Kotiswar .
The Court heard senior counsel, HS Paonam assisted by A Arunkumar, as counsels of the petitioner .
The Court issued a notice, returnable within two weeks and S Rupachandra, Senior Assistant Solicitor General, assisted by Beedyasaree and M Debananda, accepted the notice on behalf of respondent number 1, 2 and 3 .
The petitioner counsel submitted that petitioner number 3, M Debananda, was appointed as legal advisor/ legal counsel of RIMS by an order on August 19, 2016, with the condition that the appointment is terminable by either side by giving one month notice or one month pay.
The counsel further submitted that the petitioner’s service was terminated on August 16, 2017, after which M Debananda was appointed as the legal advisor/ defense counsel .
The petitioner submitted that no notice was given nor one month’s pay was provided and prayed to stay as far as termination of the petitioner is concerned .
The counsel also submitted that the petitioner is not seeking any stay in regard to the appointment of M Debananda at the stage as the petitioner does not have any objection to the appointment of as many legal advisor/ defense counsel as RIMS wishes .
M Debananda, assisting defense counsel of the respondents, submitted that one months’ pay had already been given to the petitioner which is denied by the petitioner .
After hearing both the submission of the petitioner and the respondent counsels, the Court passed an order directing that the order dated August 18, 2017, shall remain suspended as far as termination of the petitioner as legal advisor is concerned and the remaining part of the order passed on the same day including the appointment of M Debananda, as legal advisor, is not to be affected .
The respondent counsel of M Debananda also submitted that there is some typographical mistake in the order as the impugned order was actually issued on September 16, though it showed August 16, 2017 and further submitted that necessary correction have already been made in the order .
The Court listed the matter for hearing on November 6 .
Source: The Sangai Express