Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Manish Choudhury, Devashis Baruah, JJ.
Shri Besuhsai Thuluo - Appellant
Versus
The State of Nagaland through the Chief Secretary and ors. – Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 20[K]/2024, I.A.[C] NO. 17/2024
Decided On : 09-12-2024
(A) Nagaland Work-Charged and Casual Employees Act, 2001 - Policy and Scheme for Regularization of Service of Work-Charged Employees - The appellant, a fixed pay contingency employee, sought regularization in the Group-D post of Multi Tasking Staff (MTS) based on Office Memoranda dated 22.09.2004 and 17.03.2015. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, finding the appellant's claims untenable as he did not meet the criteria for regularization under the applicable policies. The learned Single Judge quashed the illegal appointment of the respondent no. 5, directing a proper selection process for the vacancy. (Paras 10.12, 14)
(B) Equal Pay for Equal Work - The principle was discussed in the context of the appellant's claim for pay parity with regular employees, emphasizing that the court should refrain from interfering in matters of pay scales and regularization policies, which are the prerogative of the government. (Paras 11, 12)
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
This intra-court appeal is preferred taking exception to a Judgment and Order dated 29.07.2024 passed by a learned Single Judge in a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 81 of 2022 which the writ appellant had preferred as the writ petitioner. In the writ petition, assail was inter-alia made to an Office Letter no. ST/3-2/2000[Pt-1]/13 dated 14.04.2022 and an Office Order no. S&T-138/2021/963 dated 20.04.2022. By the Judgment and Order dated 29.07.2024, the writ petition came to be dismissed.
2. The necessary and relevant background facts, which led the writ appellant-writ petitioner [hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant’, for short] to prefer the writ petition can be exposited, briefly, at first.
3. By an Office Order bearing no. ST/SC-19/04 dated 16.03.2011 issued under the hand of the respondent no. 4, the petitioner came to be appointed as Night Chowkidar on a fixed pay of Rs. 6,000/-per month initially for a period of three months w.e.f. 01.04.2011 to 31.07.2011 in the establishment of the Directorate of Science & Technology, Government of Nagaland, Kohima. The Office Order stated that the fixed pay would be paid from wages pay and extension of service would be subject to availability of fund from wages. It was made specific that the appointment was purely on temporary basis subject to termination at any time without giving notice from either side. The engagement of the appellant was extended from time to time, with the last extension upto 30.12.2022 by an Office Order dated 14.04.2021, was prevalent at the time of filing the writ petition.
3.1. When a vacancy in a Grade-IV post of Chowkidar arose in the Directorate of Science & Technology due to retirement of one Sri Kegwathan Keppen, a Departmental Screening Committee was constituted for recommending the name of a candidate for appointment against the said vacancy in the post of Chowkidar [Grade-IV] in terms of an Office Memorandum dated 07.12.2016 of the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Nagaland. The Departmental Screening Committee after conducting screening test on 28.02.2017 in respect of four applicants, namely, [i] Smti. Nuvozolo Khamo; [ii] Sri Besuhsai Thuluo [the appellant]; [iii] Sri Besukro D. Vadeo; and [iv] Sri Imtiosen Chang; recommended the name of Smti. Nuvozolo Khamo, the seniormost contingency paid employee, for appointment to the said post of Chowkidar [Grade-IV]. Thereafter, by an Office Order dated 21.03.2017, Smti. Nuvozolo Khamo was appointed/regularized in the said vacancy in the post of Chowkidar [Grade-IV] w.e.f. 01.03.2017.
3.2. The appellant on 24.03.2017 submitted a Representation before the respondent no. 4 seeking grant of scale of pay to him. As the respondent authorities did not pay any heed to the said Representation, the appellant stated to have continued his service on fixed pay contingency basis. When the appellant got the knowledge that one Smti. Thosano Ovung, Sweeper in the Directorate of Science & Technology was going to retire on 30.11.2021 on completion of 35 years of service, the appellant once again submitted a Representation on 25.08.2021 to the respondent no. 4 to consider and appoint him in the vacancy to be created due to retirement on the premise that the appellant had rendered service for more than ten years. When Smti. Thosano Ovung, Sweeper was released from service w.e.f. 30.11.2021 by a Release Order dated 29.07.2021, the appellant once against submitted a Representation on 03.02.2022 with a prayer to appoint him in the said regular vacancy of Sweeper.
3.3. On 10.03.2022, the respondent no. 4, that is, the Director, Science & Technology, Nagaland by an Office Letter of even date submitted a list of applicants [Annexure-A] to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Science & Technology Department [the respondent no. 2] for filling up a vacant post in Group-D [Multi Tasking Staff] as follows :-
List of Applicants for filling up of Group-D [
The court upheld that fixed pay contingency employees do not qualify for regularization under work-charged employee policies, emphasizing the need for adherence to established criteria.
The principle of equal pay for equal work mandates that employees performing similar duties must receive the same remuneration, regardless of their employment status.
Temporary employees performing the same duties as regular employees are entitled to minimum wages as per the equal pay principle, asserting their right to equitable treatment.
The principle of equal pay for equal work mandates that employees performing identical duties must receive the same remuneration, regardless of their employment status.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to interpret beneficial legislation liberally to achieve the legislative intent and uphold the principle of equal pay for equal work.
The court established that eligibility for regularization and pensionary benefits must be determined based on the criteria set forth in applicable regulations, and that such benefits cannot be claime....
Temporary employees performing similar duties as regular employees are entitled to equal pay under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.
Point of law: Doctrine of equal pay for equal work, as adumbrated under Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India read with Article 14 thereof, cannot be applied in a vacuum. The constitutional sche....
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
