Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, ROBIN PHUKAN
Sweyievikul Tase, S/o Late Petekielie Tase – Appellant
Versus
Mhashekhol Richa S/o Thinuzhosa Richa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
Heard Mr. Joshua Sheqi, learned counsel for the writ appellant; Mr. A. Sophie, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1; and Mr. Imti Imchen, learned Additional Advocate General, Nagaland for the State respondents.
2. This intra-court appeal is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 06.10.2023 passed in a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 77/2023. The writ appellant herein was the respondent no. 5 in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 77/2023 and the writ petitioner therein has been impleaded as the respondent no. 1 in this appeal.
3. By the Judgment and Order dated 06.10.2023, the appointment made in favour of the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 in a Grade-IV post vide an Order of Appointment dated 31.03.2023 at the Veterinary Dispensary, Jakhama has been set aside and quashed. The petitioner therein, that is, the respondent no. 1 herein instituted the writ petition on the premise that the appointment of the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 was made on land-ownership basis but his application for appointment to the same post on land-ownership basis was not considered. It was contended that the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 was not eligible to be appointed on
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the principles of Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India in appointments, and the directive to fill....
Appointment based on landownership was limited to the first landowner, confirming no perpetual employment rights for descendants under constitutional provisions.
Landowner employment rights are limited to the original appointee and do not extend to descendants, as per government policy.
A candidate who participates in a selection process cannot later contest the appointment made, especially when not challenging the entire selection process initially.
Administrative approvals for public posts must comply with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, ensuring due process and advertisement.
The appointment of a public servant based on land ownership is valid if made prior to the enactment of a policy limiting such appointments, which does not have retrospective effect.
The court affirmed that government employment based on landownership is not guaranteed perpetually and must adhere to existing policies on vacancies.
Employment benefits based on historical land agreements are governed by current policy and limited in scope, not perpetuity. Additionally, the judiciary is restricted to the pleadings presented and c....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
