Morung Express News
Dimapur | June 16
The Gauhati High Court Kohima Bench has sought clarifications regarding the regularization of work-charged employees, citing an apparent "inconsistency" found in a joint reading of two Office Memorandums (OM) dealing with their regularisation.
According to an order issued by Justice Devashis Baruah on June 13, the Court had previously requested clarifications from the Nagaland Advocate General (AG) on June 6, following a judgment by the same bench on April 27.
On June 13, the AG of Nagaland briefed the Court on the matter.
However, the judge sought specific views due to what he described as a "prima facie inconsistent stand taken by the State" of Nagaland in an earlier writ petition.
Justice Baruah noted this inconsistency arising from a combined reading of the two OMs.
He highlighted that the first OM, dated September 9, 2004, specifically pertains to work-charged employees and does not specify a fixed time period for the State to initiate regularisation cases.
On the other hand, the second OM, dated March 17, 2015, outlines two prerequisites for consideration for regularization: the employee must have already been granted a scale of pay, and they must have completed 30 years of service.
Regarding the 2015 OM (Clause 1), Justice Baruah noted that a work-charged or casual employee who had been granted a scale of pay and completed 30 years of service as of January 1, 2015, would be eligible for regularization.
Clause (1)(ii) also stipulates that if such an employee completes 30 years after January 1, 2015, they would be considered for regularisation in two annual batches, on January 1 and July 1, as observed by the judge.
Justice Baruah further pointed out a judgment by the Division Bench of the Court on February 2, 2017, which held that the 2004 OM "continues to operate insofar as it is not inconsistent" with the 2015 OM.
Considering both OMs, the judge noted that the key difference is that "work-charged employees who are on fixed pay or have not been granted the scale of pay would not require to complete 30 years for the purpose of seeking regularization”
Therefore, the Court requested the AG Nagaland to clarify whether a work-charged employee who had been granted a scale of pay would be entitled to be considered for regularisation under the 2004 OM, even if the employee had not completed 30 years of service.
Additionally, the Court sought clarification on the implications of Clause 1(ii) of the 2015 OM in such cases.
It also sought clarification on whether granting accelerated consideration of regularization to work-charged employees not granted a scale of pay would violate Article 14 of the Constitution
With these questions in mind, Justice Baruah scheduled the hearing of the writ petition to be listed again on July 27, directing that the matter be noted as part-heard.
The HC registry was instructed to send scanned copies of the case records to the Principal Seat, in case the judge is not presiding over the Kohima Bench on the scheduled day.
