The court affirmed that the principle of equal treatment in public employment must be upheld, requiring regularization for long-serving employees despite technical non-compliance with bureaucratic criteria.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. K. V. Angami, the learned Government Counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Limawapang, the learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent.

2. This writ appeal has been filed by the State of Nagaland and 3 other appellants under Rule 2(2) of the Chapter V-A of the Gauhati High Court Rules, impugning the judgment & order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned single judge in W.P.(C) No. 229/2021 whereby the State respondents were directed to regularize the services of the petitioner within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the impugned judgment.

3. The facts relevant for the instant appeal, in brief, are as follows:

(i) The writ petitioner who was appointed as work-charged labour with scale of pay and all allowances admissible from time to time for government servants of Nagaland, by an order dated 09.11.1987, issued by the Executive Engineer (PWD), Mangkolemba Division, Mokokchung District, was released from service w.e.f. 31.03.2017 by an Order dated 24.05.2017 issued by the Executive Engineer, PWD (H) Division, Mokokchung, Nagaland on attaining 60 years of age and after having completed 29 years 4 months and 21 days of service. Since no pension and pensionary benefits was given to her on account of non-regularization of her service, she approached this Court by filing the WP(C)No.111(K)/2019, praying for appropriate order or direction directing the respondents to regularize her service so as to entitle her to get pension and pensionary benefits.

(ii) The said Writ Petition was disposed of by an Order dated 30.07.2019 by this Court. The operative portion of the same reads as follows:

“I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. In view of the consent of the parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 & 4 to examine the petitioner’s representation dated 20.05.2017 and take a decision there on, in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 22.09.2004 and 17.03.2015, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision taken should thereafter be communicated to the petitioner. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.”

(iii) In pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the petitioner’s representation was considered, however, same was rejected by the respondent No. 2 in terms of the advice given by the Additional Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, P&AR Department (O&M Branch) which reads as follows:

“(i) Office Memorandum dated 17-03- 2015 is a scheme for regularization of work-charged employees who have completed 30 (thirty) years or more continuous service. However, since the petitioner had served only 29 years 4 months 21 days and retired, regularization of her work-charged service would not be feasible under the aforesaid Office Memorandum (ii) Office Memorandum dated 22-09-2004 is scheme for regularization of work- charged employees against 50% of all vacancies of similar nature in the Department. However, this scheme is being modified vide Para (iii) of Office Memorandum dated 17-03-2015 enhancing the quota for work-charged employees from 50% to 67% for the next 5 (five) years effective from 01-01- 2015. The existing scheme already expired w.e.f. 31-12-2019. In view of the above, we regret our inability to convey clearance for regularization of work- charged service of Smt. Imyanglula who had already retired from service after rendering only 29 years 4 months 21 days. This has the approval of the Commissioner & Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department.”

(iv) Being aggrieved by t