IMPORTANT POINT
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 vacancies in accordance with the relevant Office Memorandum.

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 land-ownership basis, in terms of the extant policy governing the matter of such appointment. In the writ petition, the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 raised a preliminary objection on the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that at the time of preferring the application for the post in question on 09.07.2021, writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was already over-aged as he was over 35 years, which is ordinarily, the upper age-limit for entry into Government employment in Nagaland. Negating such contention raised as preliminary issue on behalf of the writ appellant respondent no. 5, the learned Single Judge in view of two Office Memoranda – one dated 16.07.2021 providing for one year relaxation in upper-age limit w.e.f. 22.04.2022 and the other dated 22.02.2022 providing relaxation for two years in upper age-limit w.e.f. 28.02.2022 -had observed that the application submitted by the petitioner-respondent no. 1 ought to have been considered as in time, in view of the relaxation in upper age-limit, provided by the Office Memoranda. With such observation, the writ petition was allowed directing the State respondents to consider the application of the petitioner-respondent no. 1 dated 09.07.2021 and to take immediate necessary steps for his appointment in the Grade-IV post at the Veterinary Dispensary, Jakhama by taking into consideration the Agreement dated 08.12.1975 made by the State respondents with the land-owners of Jakhama for the lands required to establish the Veterinary Dispensary at Jakhama.

4. The vacancy in the post in Grade-IV at the Veterinary Dispensary, Jakhama had arisen earlier due to retirement of one Tepusio Taje, against which the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 was appointed on 31.03.2023. From the affidavit-in-opposition of the State respondents filed in the writ petition, it has emerged with the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 was appointed on the basis of land-ownership, but without any kind of selection process in conformity with Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India. From the case papers, it has further emerged that there was an Agreement executed on 08.12.1975 with 11 nos. of land-owners of Jakhama by the State respondents to set-up the Veterinary Dispensary at Jakhama and as per the said Agreement, one of the original land-owners was one Khujon, who donated his land for the purpose of establishing the Veterinary Dispensary at Jakhama. It has further emerged that Sri Tepusio Taje, whose retirement has created the vacancy in Grade-IV for which the writ appellant-respondent no. 5 and the petitioner-respondent no. 1 are competing, was also appointed as descendent of one of the original land-owners.

5. A copy of the Agreement dated 08.12.1975 on the basis of lands were taken over for establishment of t