The Manipur High Court on Thursday took up the long-running grievance of a government-aided school teacher, ruling that his challenge to a suspension order can be examined directly under writ jurisdiction. The matter, heard at Imphal, revolves around unpaid salaries, disputed school management committees, and a suspension that has stayed unresolved for years.
The court’s order brought some clarity, at least on one issue: whether the teacher was even in the right forum. The answer, for now, is yes.
Read also:- Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Bus Driver’s Acquittal, Says Mechanical Brake Failure Ruled Out Rash Driving Allegations in 2007
Background
The case was filed by Shri Mutum Shyamo Singh, a teacher at Tangjeng Ningthou High School (Aided), Thoubal. He approached the High Court questioning a show-cause notice dated June 10, 2022, followed by a suspension order issued five days later. Alongside this, he sought release of salary arrears stretching over nearly four years and questioned how the School Management Committee itself was formed.
The State and the school authorities opposed the petition. The School Management Committee argued that the writ was not maintainable at all, saying the teacher should first exhaust remedies available under the Government Aided Private School Teachers (Discipline, Punishment and Appeal) Rules. In simple terms, their stand was: go to the departmental appellate forum first, not the High Court.
Read also:- Jharkhand High Court Grants Final Surrender Window to Sourav Bardhan in ED Case, Modifies Earlier Bail Order Citing Supreme Court Law
Court’s Observations
The bench carefully walked through the service rules that govern teachers in aided schools. It noted that the rules clearly separate penalties like termination or compulsory retirement from suspension, which is only a temporary measure during inquiry or investigation.
“The court observed that suspension is not listed as a punishment under Rule 1 of the Rules,” the order notes, making it clear that appeal provisions kick in only when a penalty is imposed after inquiry.
The judge also addressed the argument about alternative remedies. While higher courts often insist that statutory remedies be used first, the bench reminded that this is not an absolute bar. The court observed, “Availability of an alternative remedy is a rule of discretion, not a rule of compulsion.”
Importantly, the teacher was not just questioning his suspension but also the very legality of the School Management Committee that issued it. Since no final punishment had been imposed, the appellate route under the rules was not yet available, the court reasoned.
Read also:- Supreme Court steps in Punjab fraud case, issues notice and grants interim bail protection to Harjit Kaur against possible arrest
Decision
In view of these findings, the Manipur High Court held that the writ petition is maintainable and cannot be thrown out merely on the ground of alternative remedy. The challenge to the suspension order passed by the School Management Committee will therefore proceed.
The matter has now been listed along with connected cases for further hearing on January 16, 2026, leaving the substantive issues to be decided later.
Case Title: Shri Mutum Shyamo Singh vs The State of Manipur & Others
Case No.: WP(C) No. 184 of 2023
Case Type: Writ Petition (Service Matter – Suspension / Maintainability)
Decision Date: 19 December 2025
