Kohima, October 31 (MExN): A Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) of Nagaland government employees’ associations has refuted the state government's defence of its recent IAS induction list, alleging the process violates constitutional mandates and Supreme Court directives. The committee, comprising CANSSEA, FONSESA, NIDA, NSSA, and NF&ASA, issued a point-by-point rebuttal to statements made by the Government Spokesperson on the controversial inductions.
Responding to the government's assertion that it “acted within the constitutional framework over IAS induction,” the committee questioned how appointments could be constitutional when the initial entry of officers into service “had been in violation of constitutionally mandated process of recruitment namely in violation of Article-14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.” They argued that “Induction into the IAS is not akin to attaining Sainthood where your past sins are forgiven. We are still on Earth where the rule of Law prevails.”
The committee also countered the spokesperson's description of the term “backdoor appointees” as misleading. Where the government stated that “Regularized officers serving with integrity and seniority had earned their due consideration,” the committee asked, “What would you call an officer who has entered service without undergoing the constitutionally mandated process of recruitment?” They cited the landmark Supreme Court judgement in Uma Devi vs State of Karnataka (2006), stating it clearly held that “regularization of irregularly appointed employees does not cure the defect of the initial appointment.” The committee accused the government of attempting to “white wash backdoor appointees and glorify them.”
On the government's argument that “Not everyone can excel in competitive exams but if officers prove their capability through service and responsibility there should be room for their advancement as well,” the committee termed this “an irony.” They stated that the government is “pleading the case of such backdoor appointee for equal opportunity when it is such an employee who has violated Article-16 of the Constitution of India.”
The committee also rejected the government's comparison of the situation with a Supreme Court judgement from Rajasthan, clarifying that the Rajasthan case pertained to “seats for Non-SCS officers for induction into the IAS,” whereas in Nagaland, the case concerns “the inclusion of irregularly appointed officer in the Panel List for IAS induction.”
