THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
Devashis Baruah, J.
Smti. Alila Ao, D/O Lt. Nungshi Ao – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Nagaland Represented By The Principal Secretary And Ors – Respondents
WP(C) 82 of 2025
Decided On : 16-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner’s employment background and regularization request. (Para 2) |
| 2. court's observations on relevant office memorandums regarding employee regularization. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. ordered actions for considering petitioner’s regularization. (Para 7) |
| 4. no cost ordered on disposal of writ petition. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
Devashis Baruah, J.
Heard Mr. Moa Jamir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in the batch of writ petitions. Ms. Bichano Kithan, learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the State of Nagaland. Mr. Lelimthong P. Yimchunger, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5 and 6.
2. The case of the petitioner herein is that vide an Office Order LAW/JE/10/87 dated 04.03.1989 the petitioner was appointed as a contingency paid Sweeper under the Office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner ADC(J), Wokha, Nagaland at a fixed pay of Rs. 450/- per month from 01.02.1989. Subsequent thereto vide Office Order dated 07.09.2017 the petitioner was appointed to the post of Sweeper under the establishment of District & Sessions Judge, Wokha for a period of one year w.e.f. 01.10.2017 in the scale of pay of Rs. 2250-55-2660-60-3200/- under ROP 1999. The petitioner thereupon submitted a Representation seeking regularization. The same having not been considered the petitioner has therefore, approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
3. A perusal of the records of the present writ petition shows that this Court had issued notice almost 8 (eight) months’ back. The respondents have not filed any affidavit-in-opposition.
4. It is brought to the attention of this Court that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the Order passed by this Court in WP(C)/316/2023 dated 04.04.2025.
5. This Court also finds it very pertinent to take note of that in terms with the Office Memorandum (OM) dated 17.03.2015 all existing Work- charged and Casual Employees of various Departments who were enjoying scale of pay and who have completed 30 (Thirty) years of service or more continuous service as on 01.01.2015 would be regularized by conversion of their posts into regular posts personal to them and subject to fulfillment of conditions as indicated in the said Memorandum. It is also pertinent to take note of that in terms with Clause 1(ii) of the OM dated 17.03.2015, those Work-charged and Casual Employees enjoying scale of pay and who have completed 30 (Thirty) years of continuous service after 01.01.2015 their case for regularization would be taken up subsequently in two batches, i.e. on 1st July and 1st January every year. It is very relevant to take note of that the OM dated 17.03.2015 only related to regularization and absorption of Casual and Work-charged Employees and revision of pay/wages. However, subsequently vide Notification dated 05.03.2025, all contingency, fixed and wage pay employees appointed on or before 06.06.2016 were deemed to be casual employees and hence, would come within the ambit of the OM dated 17.03.2015. For the purpose of the present adjudication, Notification dated 05.03.2025 is reproduced herein under:-
GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND
PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT
(ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS BRANCH)
NAGALAND: KOHIMA
No.AR/LEGAL-5/8/2024
Dated: Kohima, the 5th March, 2025.
NOTIFICATION
Sub: Inclusion of Contingency, Fixed and Wage paid employees as Casual Employees under the Nagaland Work-charged and Casual Employees Regulation Act, 2001.
In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section 4 (b) & (c) of Chapter III of the Nagaland Work-charged and Casual employees Regulation Act, 2001, the State Government of Nagaland hereby notifies that all Contingency, Fixed and Wage paid employees appointed on or before the 6 June, 2016 shall be deemed to be Casual employees and shall henceforth come under the Work Charged and Casual Employees Commission and shall be eligible for the Schemes and provisions so notified under the p
The court directed the authorities to regularize the petitioner's position, emphasizing compliance with established government memorandums regarding employee service regularization.
Employees with over 30 years of service must be considered for regularization under updated state regulations, emphasizing compliance with governmental directives.
Employees who completed service requirements must be considered for regularization post-retirement under applicable state policies, including entitlement to benefits.
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 work-charged employees are entitled to regularization based on seniority and qualifications as per the 2004 Office Memorandum, not the 2015 one requiring 30 years of servic....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioner to regularization in his service against the lowest scale of pay permissible for Grade-IV employees within the PH....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's entitlement to regularization of service was upheld based on previous judgments and orders, the discrimination faced by the p....
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.