IMPORTANT POINT
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.

JUDGMENT :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG

Heard Ms. Imnasenla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. E. Thiba Phom, learned Government Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. C. T. Jamir, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. I. Imchen, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

2. Being aggrieved by the impugned appointment order dated 07.08.2014, issued by the Principal Directorate, Health & Family Welfare, Nagaland, Kohima appointing Shri. M. Lanutoshi (respondent no. 5) to the post of Medical Attendant at Yaongyimsen Sub-Centre under the establishment of Chief Medical Officer, Mokokchung, the petitioner filed this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction of the like nature and prays for quashing and setting aside of the same.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s clan are land owners of the land where the present Primary Health Centre (PHC), Yaongyimsen is established by the Government. The land was donated free of cost to the Yaongyimsen village council by late Lanuchiba, the great grandfather of the petitioner for developmental work without claiming any compensation whatsoever. Thereafter, the Yaongyimsen Village Council handed over the said plot of land to the medical department for establishment of the present Primary Health Centre (PHC), Yaongyimsen without taking any compensation.

4. Therefore, being the original land owner, the petitioner had submitted his application praying for his appointment on the basis of land ownership. The further case of the petitioner is that 2 (two) posts of Medical Attendant fell vacant at Yaongyimsen Sub-Centre under the Chief Medical Officer, Mokokchung due to superannuation and retirement of Shri. Imlitemsu on 30.11.2013, and Smti. Rendipokla on 30.06.2014 respectively.

5. And as practiced, the petitioner being a member of the land owners had submitted an application before the Principal Directorate, Health & Family Welfare, Nagaland, Kohima with a prayer for his appointment against the post of Medical Attendant which fell vacant due to the retirement of Shri. Imlitemsu.

6. However, vide order dated 07.08.2014 issued by the Principal Directorate, Health & Family Welfare, Nagaland, Kohima (respondent no. 3), one Shri. M. Lanutoshi (respondent no. 5) was appointed against the said vacant post created due to the retirement of Shri. Imlitemsu. The respondent no. 5 is not a land owner of the donated land where the present Medical Sub-Centre is established.

7. Being aggrieved by the said appointment of the respondent no. 5, who is not a land owner, the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before this Court being registered and numbered as WP(C)/117(K)/2015. The petitioner inter alia alleged that the respondent no. 5 had secured the said appointment by committing forgery and fraud. Hence, his appointment be cancelled, and the writ petitioner being the member of the land owner be appointed against the said post on land ownership basis.

8. However, during the pendency of the said writ petition, the State government vide notification dated 05.03.2018, has framed a policy with regards to the appointment to Grade-IV post on land ownership basis. Clause 3 of the said notification clearly lays down that employment of land owner if permitted by a verifiable and valid agreement, is limited to the person first appointed as landowner in Government service and does not entitle his descendants for further employment on his retirement from service. After the appointed landowner retires or vacates the post, the vacancy will be filled up through open advertisement in consonance with the existing policy giving equal opportunity to all applicants. It further contained that the said notification dated 05.03.2018 supersedes the earlier notification dated 26.07.2005.

9. It is the further case of the petitioner that one Smti. Toshimenla has already been appointed on the basis of land ownership. Hence,