IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment emphasized the importance of adherence to the Office Memorandum and the need for the respondent authorities to communicate the fate of the representations filed by the petitioners within a specified timeframe.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Moa Jamir, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. E. Thiba Phom, learned Government Advocate, for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Smti Mutsiphulu Khamo, Shri Virieletuo Khawakhrie and Shri Neikieto Peseyie for enforcement of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed Under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

3. The petitioners have been aggrieved by non-consideration of their joint representations dated 20.02.2019 and 14.07.2020 regarding regularization of their service as LDA-cum-computer Assistants after being qualified in the Suitability Test conducted by the respondent No. 3. The petitioners have also alleged that the respondents have not adhered to the Office Memorandum No. AR-5/ASSO/98, dated 04.08.2008 as well as Office Memorandum No. AR-5/ASSO/98 dated 11.08.2016, which provides for regularization of services of employees who were on contract/adhoc basis and who have completed the continuous service of 3 years.

4. The case of the petitioners is that all the above named petitioners were appointed as LDA-cum-Computer Assistants in the Directorate of Social Welfare Nagaland, Kohima on contract basis against sanctioned posts, initially for a period of one year or till the post is filled by direct recruitment whichever is earlier, thereafter, their services were extended from time to time on the basis of extension orders and they are still continuing in service.

5. The petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 01.02.2012, petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 11.04.2013 and petitioner No. 3 was appointed on 4. 09.2013. All the petitioners have completed more than 10 years of service as on date. It is contended by the petitioners that in pursuant to the policy decision taken by State Government, the Office Memorandum No. AR-5/ASSO/98, 04.08.2008 was issued by the state respondents whereby providing for regularization of services of contract/ adhoc appointments, against sanctioned posts, of those who have completed three years of continuous service. It is contended by the petitioners that the said policy decision of the State Government was taken to facilitate the contract/adhoc employees who have put into long service and have already become overage for other public employment, however, their utility is still there for public service.

6. It is also contended by the petitioners that a non-governmental organization called “Against Corruption and Unabated Taxation”, (hereafter called “ACAUT”) filed a public interest litigation before this court, which was registered as PIL No. 11(K)/2015, seeking directions for CBI investigation into widespread corruption in public employment. During impendency of the aforesaid PIL, the Government of Nagaland had issued Office Memorandum dated 06.06.2016 by which appointment on contract basis has been totally banned. After issuance of the Office Memorandum dated 06.06.2016, the Department of Personal and Administrative Reforms, Nagaland has issued another Office Memorandum No. AR-5/ASSO/98, dated 11th August, 2016, providing that the cases of the employees appointed on contract/adhoc basis prior to the Office Memorandum of 06.06.2016 shall be taken up for regularization on completion of three years of continuous service in terms of Office Memorandum dated 04.08.2018.

7. Thereafter, in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 04.08.2018 and 11.08.2016, the respondent No. 2 by notification No. DSW/ESTT-1/2003/PT-1 dated 06.10.2016 constituted a committee to conduct Suitability Test for regularization of contract employees who have completed three years of continuous service against sanctioned posts under the Directorate of Social Welfare, Nagaland. Thereafter, on 29.11.2016 and 30.11.2016, Suitability Test was conducted by the department for several posts including nine posts of LDA-cum-Computer Assistants. All the three above named petitioners have qualified the sui