The Youth Affairs & Sports (YAS) Department of the Government of Manipur is facing uncomfortable questions after a senior coach formally challenged an in-charge appointment that allegedly overlooked established seniority norms.
An official order dated February 3, 2026, issued by the Secretariat of the Youth Affairs & Sports Department under “Orders by the Governor,” transferred and posted five officers. Among them, M. Bimoljit Singh, Coach (Wushu), was assigned to function as Assistant Director (Training & Coaching) on an in-charge basis, without additional remuneration, as an interim arrangement.
As per information available with Imphal Times, a formal representation has been submitted to the Director of Youth Affairs & Sports by Ksh. Naba Singh, a Swimming Coach currently serving as in-charge of Khuman Lampak Swimming Pool, questioning the decision and asserting that he is senior to the officer who has been entrusted with the in-charge responsibility.
In his representation, the senior coach stated that he was promoted as Swimming Coach in March 2014 and placed above M. Bimoljit Singh in the relevant order and service records. He contended that the settled administrative practice of following seniority in assigning higher duties on an in-charge basis appears to have been disregarded in the present case.
The letter further states that the non-consideration of his case, despite what he describes as the requisite qualifications, experience, and service record, has caused him “genuine grievance” and may adversely affect service morale within the department.
While the February 3 order describes the appointment as purely interim and without financial benefit, the representation raises a broader concern: whether established principles of seniority were duly examined before issuing the posting order.
The complainant has requested a formal review of the decision and has sought reconsideration of his eligibility for assignment as Assistant Director (Training & Coaching) or DYASO, citing fairness and administrative propriety.
The Department must explain under what norms and statutory provisions a junior officer was preferred over a senior, and on what basis seniority was bypassed in granting the in-charge responsibility.