Thungdeno Mozhui vs State of Nagaland - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 10964

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A. Zhimomi, Esther, Imti Longjem, Lhousino
For the Respondents: S. Mere, A. Zho, T. B. Jamir

Table of Content
1. factual history of employment and subsequent initiation of lokayukta complaint. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
2. arguments regarding the lokayukta's jurisdiction and lack of procedural fairness. (Para 12 , 13 , 30 , 31)
3. conflicting contentions regarding service regularization and validity of investigation. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
4. procedural compliance with principles of natural justice and transparency. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47)
5. limitation period applicability in lokayukta act proceedings. (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52)
6. scope of lokayukta's investigative jurisdiction over non-corruption service matters. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60)
7. nature of lokayukta findings as recommendations and required adherence to law. (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76)
8. final invalidation of findings due to jurisdictional and procedural errors. (Para 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82)

JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

Heard Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms