2018 Supreme(Gau) 1664
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (KOHIMA BENCH)
Songkhupchung Serto, J.
Shikhu Saghu - Appellants
Vs.
State of Nagaland and Ors. - Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 267(K) of 2017
Decided On : 22-11-2018
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sentiyanger, Moa Jamir, Chubangshi, Ayang Imchen and Moasenla, Advs.
For the Respondents: V. Suokhrie, Addl. Sr. GA
Headnote:
Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (Second Amendment) Act, 2009 – Sections 3(1), 3(2) – Evidence Act – Section-115 – Services Issue – Aggrieved by the impugned order releasing him from service, the petitioner has come before this Court claiming that his length of his service was wrongly counted i.e. the date on which he was first appointed to the post of LDA in the pay scale of Rs. 255-6-315-EB-7-350-EB-10-400/- p.m. for a period of three months and also claiming that his length of service should be counted only i.e. the day he was first appointed as Booking Assistant/Ticket Examiner(Class-III service of NST) in the scale of pay of Rs. 450-11-538-12-670 – Held, the petitioner did not voluntarily retired but was forced to retire by issuing the impugned order he cannot be blamed for not having work in the Department – Therefore, he cannot be denied his entitlement as a Government servant – However, since his service was not utilized from the date he was released till today he should be given only his basic pay but from the day he rejoined his service, needless to say but he should be given his full pay and allowances as permissible under rule – The argument that the petitioner kept quiet when he was issued the released order, therefore, it should be assumed that he has accepted the same and for that very reason he is estopped from claiming reinstatement does not appear to be correct factually and not acceptable in law for two reasons – Because his claim that he submitted representation to the authorities is neither denied nor refuted – Secondly, because if the petitioner cannot be blamed for the wrong committed by the respondents – Writ Petitions Disposed
JUDGMENT :
Songkhupchung Serto, J.
1. I have heard Mr. Moa Jamir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate who appeared on behalf of the State respondents in all the writ petitions.
2. This writ petition was heard along with four writ petitions being W.P.(C) No. 267(K) of 2017, W.P.(C) No. 248(K) of 2017, W.P.(C) No. 247(K) of 2017, W.P.(C) No. 268(K) of 2017 & W.P.(C) No. 273(K) of 2017. However, I have decided to dispose of this writ petition separately in view of the slight differences in the fact and circumstances and the prayers.
3. Before I go any further, the facts and circumstances which lead to the filing of this writ petition are summed up here below;
By Office order dated 03.08.1980, issued by the General Manager, Nagaland State Transport, Government of Nagaland, the petitioner was appointed as LDA in the pay scale of Rs. 255-6-325-EB-7-350-EB-10-400/- p.m. plus other allowance as are admissible under rules from time to time, on causal basis, for a period of three months from the date of his joining and the appointment being terminable automatically on expiry of the term, if not extended otherwise by the competent authority and with no entitlement for regular absorption to the post. Thereafter, on completion of his term of three months his service was terminated but after a gap of one or two days he was appointed afresh to the same post by issuing another appointment order for a limited period under the same condition. In the same manner several appointment and termination orders followed and that continued till 06.09.1986, the day, the term of his last casual appointment as LDA was over. After a gap of two days vide order No. NST/ESTT/3-C9PT)/81/357-64, dated 09.09.1986, issued by the General Manager, NST, the petitioner was appointed on casual basis for a period of three months as Booking Assistant/Ticket Examiner (Class-in service of NST) in the pay scale of Rs. 450-11-538-12-670-18-15-885/- p.m. plus other allowance as admissible under rules from time to time, with effect from the date of joining the post. Thereafter, by another order issued by the General Manager, NST, vide Memo No. NST/ESTT/1978/2193-100, dated 28.01.1987, the service of the petitioner along with that of similarly situated persons was extended till 31.03.1987. After the end of the term of the petitioner's appointment his term of service was extended twice till 18.08.1987, vide Order No. NST/ESTT/1978/907-14, dated 27.04.1987, and Order No. NST/ESTT/1978/3115-21, dated 10.07.1987 respectively, both issued by Assistant General Manager, NST. On the day, the term of the petitioner's service ended, vide Order No. NST/ESTT/1978/414-21, dated 18.8.1987, issued by Assistant General Manager, NST, the service of the petitioner was terminated with immediate effect However, on the very next day, the General Manager, Nagaland State Transport, Dimapur, vide his Order No. NST/EST/3-C/Pt-IV/86/471-82, dated 19.08.1987, appointed the petitioner on regular basis to the same post, in the scale of pay of Rs. 450-11-538-12-670-EB-15-805/- p.m. plus other allowances as admissible under rules. After about 28 years, on 7.8.2015, the Divisional Manager, Nagaland State Transport, Government of Nagaland, vide his Office Memo No. NST/DM/K/ESTT/36/2015-16/175, issued an order releasing the petitioner from service in terms of section-3(1) & 3(2) of the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (Second Amendment) Act, 2009 read with P & AR Department Notification No. AR-3/GEN-174/2007(PT), dated 17.08.2009, along with other employees serving under the same Department purportedly for the reason that they have completed 35 years length of service counting from the date of their first appointment to Government service i.e. as LDA in the case of the petitioner. The same is reproduced here below;
"Government of Nagaland
Office o
Click Here to Read the rest of this document