Dismissed

Mr. Inpi Konyak v. the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Mar 2022WP(C)/18/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a 30-year service work-charged employee, sought regularization and pay upgrade under a 2015 Office Memorandum. The court directed the State to dispose of his representation within a month if he meets eligibility criteria.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to dispose of petitioner's representation for pay upgrade and regularization within one month if eligible.

Mr. Inpi Konyak Vs the State of Nagaland and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC020000522021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 18/2021

¶5

1:MR. INPI KONYAK

¶6

WORK CHARGED LABOUR O/O THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD(R AND B) ABOI DIVISION MON NAGALAND

¶7

VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF NAGALAND NAGALAND KOHIMA 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND WORKS AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT NAGALAND KOHIMA 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER(R AND B) NAGALAND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT(NPWD) NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(R AND B) PWD ABOI DIVISION MON NAGALAND 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND

¶8

Page No.# 2/3

¶9

DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS NAGALAND

¶10

KOHIMA

¶11

6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : L LIKHASE SANGTAM Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶15

08-03-2022

¶16

Heard Mr. L Lihase Sangtam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. V Zhimomi, leaned State counsel.

¶17

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Work-charged Scale Employee in the office of the Chief Engineer, PWD, (R&B), Aboi Division, by the Executive Engineer on the said division. The petitioner continued to be in service and in the year 2009, his pay was enhanced. Since the pay given to them was not enough for maintenance of his family, he submitted a representation before the Chief Engineer, PWD (R&B), on 14.06.2020, requesting him to upgrade scale of pay. However, no positive response has been received so far. According to the petitioner due to non-up gradation of his scale of pay, though he has completed 30 years of service, he is unable to get the benefit of the office memorandum No. AR3/GEN-201/2009 dated 17.03.2015, by which existing Work-charged and Casual Employees of various departments who have completed 30 years of continuous service are made entitle to be regularized. Accordingly, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner submitted on 14.06.2020 before the Chief Engineer, PWD, Government of Nagaland and upgrade his pay to scale pay so that he may also be eligible for getting the benefits under the said office memorandum.

¶18

Mr. V Zhimomi, leaned State counsel appearing for the State submits that the writ petitions may be disposed of by giving a direction to the State respondents to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioners.

¶19

Page No.# 3/3

¶20

On hearing the parties, there is no dispute with respect to the existence of the OM No. AR—3/GEN-201/2009 dated 17.03.2015. The provision of the OM clearly stipulates that all existing work-charged and casual employees of various departments who are in the scale pay and who have completed 30 years or more continuous service as on 01.01.2015, will be regularized by conversion of their posts into regular ones personal to them and subject to fulfillment of conditions as indicated below (only the relevant portion of the OM No. AR3/GEN-201/2009 dated 17.03.2015 is extracted):

¶21

“1. Regularisation in service:

¶22

(i) All existing work-charged and casual employees of various Departments who are enjoying scale pay and who have completed 30 (thirty) years or more continuous service as on 01.01.2015 will be regularized by conversion of their posts into regular ones personal to them and subject to fulfillment of conditions as indicated below:

¶23

(a) The incumbent concerned and his/her service rendered as work-charged/casual employee

¶24

(b) Availability of service records including appointment order, date of initial appointment, proof of length of service/age etc.

¶25

(f) The past service rendered as work-charged/casual employee shall be counted towards length of service for the purpose of Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 2009 and as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.”

¶26

Having considered the records and facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present petition may be disposed of with the following directions:

¶27

The State respondent shall consider and dispose of the representation dated 14.06.2020, filed by the petitioner, if the petitioner is found eligible in terms of the OM dated 17.03.2015. The respondent shall make all efforts to dispose of the matter within a month’s time of the passing of this order.

¶28

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Mr. Inpi Konyak v. the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Inpi Konyak v. the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.D. Enterprises and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Tarif Hussain and 19 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Binod Mushahary @ Batha @ Biban Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Mr. Yamlao Vs the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.

Mr. Moaba Konyak Vs the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.

Shri. Moarenba Vs the State of Nagaland and 5 Ors.