IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.
Smti. Viseyieno Richa, W/o Mhashekhol Richa - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Nagaland And 4 Ors - Respondents
WP(C) 222 of 2024
Decided on : 08-08-2025
JUDGMENT :
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the appointment of respondent No. 5 vide appointment order No. VET/EST-3/KMA/I/PT-I/2023-24 dated 12.08.2024 which was in violation of the Office Memorandum dated 16.08.2018 and the decision of this Court in W.A.11/2023 dated 27.03.2024, (Annexure-C1).
2. It is contended that the Clause 3(b) of OM No. LR/LAND-PLCY/5-26/2011 dated 16.08.2018 reads as:-
“3. (b)It is also clarified that it is not the policy of the Government to provide employment or other facility to the landowner in perpetuity. The employment or other facility of landowner, 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 descendant for further employment or other facility on his retirement from service vacates the post. After the appointed landowner retires or vacates the post, the vacancy will be filled up through open advertisement in consonance with the existing government policy giving equal opportunity to all applicants.”
3. It is submitted that the plot of land where the present Veterinary Dispensary, Jakhama, is situated was sold to the Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, Government of Nagaland in lieu of Grade-IV posts by 11 land owners vide deed of release dated 10.10.1975. Subsequently, the agreement deed dated 08.12.1975, was executed and as per the agreement deed, the land owners declared that they would part with their respective plot of land for establishment of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary outpost at Jakhama for consideration of Rs. 1500/- per acre under the condition that they would be accorded opportunity with first priority in case of vacancies being created. Annexure-A & A1 are the copies of the deed of release dated 10.10.1975 and copy of the agreement deed dated 08.12.1975.
4. The present petitioner Smt. Viseyieno Richais the wife of Shri Mhashekhol Richa who is a bonafide member of 'Richa Clan' and this clan is one of the land owners marked at Serial No. 6 of the agreement deed. It is contended that Shri Tepuseo Tase, Shri SweyievikutoTase (respondent No. 5), are the descendants of land owners of Shri Khuzon. Shri Tepuseo Tase has already availed the benefit of appointment of Grade-IV post being descendant of land owner of Shri Khuzon. At present, Tepuseo Tase’s nephew Shri Sweyievikuto Tase, (herein after referred to as respondent No. 5) has been appointed as descendant of land owner in clear violation of the order dated 27.03.2024, passed by this Court in W.A. 11/2023.
5. The petitioner's husband Shri Mhashekhol Richa challenging the appointment order dated 31.03.2023 of respondent No. 5 filed a writ petition No. 77/2023. Vide judgment and order dated 06.10.2023, this Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the appointment order dated 31.03.2023 as the same was not in consonance with the OM dated 16.08.2018. Thereafter, the respondent No. 5 preferred W.A.11/2023 and vide judgment and order dated 27.03.2024, the state respondents were directed to fill up the vacancy in the Grade-IV posts in the Veterinary Department at Jakhama by inviting applications from eligible applicants claiming appointment on the basis of land ownership by virtue of agreement deed dated 08.12.1975 with wide publicity. The respondents were also directed to strictly abide by the terms of the OM dated 16.08.1975. The respondent No. 3 published an advertisement in the local daily dated 17.07.2024, inviting applications from land owners who have donated their land to the Veterinary dispensary at Jakhama to apply for the Grade-IV posts which were lying vacant on superannuation of Shri Tepuseo Tase.
6. On the criteria being descendant of land owner, the present petitioner who is a bonafide member of 'Richa Clan' applied for the aforementioned vacant Grade-IV post in the Veterinary Department. However, the state respondent vide order No. VET/EST-3/KMA/I/PT- I/2023-24dated 12.08.2024
Amina Marwa Sabreen (a minor) & Ors Vs. The State of Kerala & Ors
A candidate who participates in a selection process cannot later contest the appointment made, especially when not challenging the entire selection process initially.
The appointment of a public post must adhere to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, ensuring equal opportunity through proper advertisement.
Appointment based on landownership was limited to the first landowner, confirming no perpetual employment rights for descendants under constitutional provisions.
The court affirmed that government employment based on landownership is not guaranteed perpetually and must adhere to existing policies on vacancies.
A person who consciously takes part in the process of selection cannot subsequently turn around and question the method of selection and its outcome.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.