Moa Jamir
The State Government is all set to constitute the long-pending Nagaland Staff Selection Board (NSSB) “within one month,” the State’s citizens were informed on June 15, 2020. The optimistic announcement came after a meeting of the Naga Students' Federation’s (NSF) representatives with the State government led by the Chief Minister.
It was understood that the Government of Nagaland “in principle” has approved the NSSB with assurance to put things in place within the given timeframe at the meeting.
A year after, the optimism has dissolved into despair, with the Board, nowhere in sight and an Office Memorandum (OM) from the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Administrative Reforms Branch) on July 16, 2021, coming as a nasty surprise for those seeking transparency and accountability, in governance general, and of the recruitment process, in particular.
The OM looks innocuous at bare perusal, partially lifting of ban an “all fresh appointments including vacancies arising against sanctioned posts in all Government Departments,” announced via another OM on April 22, 2020. The ban was enforced “in the interest of public service in view of the COVID-19 pandemic and to maintain various austerity measures in the State for savings in all Departments.” Given the pandemic, appointments of medical staff were exempted from the ban.
However, a deeper analysis of the OM and its annexure revealed a veiled attempt at continuing the status quo, notwithstanding the demand from various organisations for a freeze on recruitment via respective departments and the ongoing process for setting up the NSSB.
As the DP&AR’s OM was issued in pursuance of a July 14 State Cabinet’s decision, it further goes to show how assurances given by politicians is ‘not worth a dime’ unless and until it is implemented on the ground. It also reflects how appeals from various quarters regarding transparency in governance are considered (or discarded) by those at the helms of affairs if the tradeoff is presumed beneficial.
For instance, the State Cabinet’s decision came just a week after a representation to the Chief Minister by the NSF urging the State Government ‘not to delay implementation of NSSB.’ In essence, the Cabinet ‘responded’ with the partial lifting of the ban on appointments against existing vacancy in “10 Departments listed in Category-A, to complete the recruitment process with respect to the total of 160 various posts.” Further, it relaxed and permitted 66 Departments listed in Category-B, for recruitment of 1,357 posts. The 160 posts in Category- A included 10 Group A, 50 Group B, 99 Group C and 1 Group D vacancy. List of Category – B post “shall be intimidated individually to each respective department, the OM stated.
“The concerned Departments shall carry out the recruitments by the NPSC and the respective Departmental Recruitment Board (DRB) (for posts outside the purview of the NPSC) as an exception, till such time the Nagaland Staff Selection Board (NSSB) is made functional,” it added. A period of 1-year relaxation of age with effect from April 22, 2020, was also given for entry into government service.
Following the OM, the NSF on July 21 had reiterated its February 22, 2020 resolution for a blanket ban on departmental exams for recruitment to various group ‘C’ posts until the implementation of the NSSB. The Federation also demanded the scrapping of departmental exams “once and for all.” Given the context in which the OM was issued, it is doubtful whether the State Government would relent.
Besides the question of transparency, the OM itself is contentious. Among others, as the freeze on fresh appointment was imposed citing ‘various austerity measures’ associated with COVID-19, is the State Government now convinced that pandemic no longer poses a fiscal challenge and requires no austerity measures?
As such, the NSSB Regulations, 2020 was notified by the DP&AR in August 2020 and despite concerns shared by certain quarters, the process is still on. Ergo, either the State Government is uncertain about its ability to constitute the same within a year or tinkering about the issue. For if it can extend the entry into government service by one year, what stops it from waiting some time to constitute the Board, and relaxing the age limit?
Accordingly, the State Cabinet’s decision and the subsequent OM on fresh appointments are premised on plain political expediency, rather than anything.
For any feedback, drop a line to jamir.moa@gmail.com
