justice. The learned counsel further submits that the present issue in regard to the service of the petitioner arose only when the Incumbent-Wise Salary statement of the employees in the department was submitted to the Government inadvertently showing the date of appointment of the petitioner as 18/12/2020 when in fact the petitioner was appointed in the service of the department as a driver on casual basis on 06/08/2004 and therefore, the appointment of the petitioner did not violate of the O.M dated 22/04/2022 issued by the Government freezing all fresh appointments. It is the case of the petitioner that the department realizing its mistake has submitted the letter dated 30/11/2021 to the Government clarifying that the petitioner’s date of appointment as a driver on casual basis is 06/08/2004 and his date of regularization is 18/12/2020 and therefore to re-examine the matter cancelling the regularization of the petitioner’s service. However, despite the clarification submitted to the Government, the department has issued the impugned order dated 13/04/2022 cancelling the regularization of the petitioner’s service and reverting him back to the casual status. In the additional affidavit, the petitioner has annexed the letter dated 02/05/2022 written by the Director, Higher Education, Nagaland, Kohima, to the Secretary, Government of Nagaland, Department of Higher Education, Nagaland, Kohima, and the letter dated 02/06/2022 written by the Director, Higher Education, Nagaland, Kohima, to the learned Government Advocate, Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench. In both the letters, it has been clearly admitted by the department that no justification can be offered for cancelling the regularization of the petitioner’s service and the department is in the process of rectifying the same.
