Dimapur, April 3 (EMN): The Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 1991, defines public employment as “appointment to any pensionable state public service or posts connected with the affairs of the State of Nagaland and the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, and includes any appointment under the Government of India, and other State Government, Central or State Public Sector Undertakings and local authority held by persons prior to their absorption under the public service of the State of Nagaland and the Nagaland Legislative Assembly which counts for the purpose of pension”.
According to DIPR report, an office memorandum from the P&AR Department has stated that clarifications have been sought by Departments from time to time whether the services rendered in adhoc/contract/work-charged/substitute capacity prior to regular appointment made through NPSC or Departmental Selection Board or any other prescribed procedure shall count as public employment for the purpose of calculation of length of service under the above Act.And whereas, in the judgment and order dated 24/07/2012, the Gauhati High Court in Case No. WA-168/2012, WA-175/2012, WA-177/2012, WA-178/2012, WA-179/2012, WA- 180/2012, WA-181/2012, WA-183/2012, had ruled that the period of service rendered on adhoc/contract/work-charged has to be counted for computation of public employment under the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (2nd Amendment) Act, 2009.
The P&AR Department had issued office memorandum of even number dated 01.08.2012 regulating counting of past service as public employment for the purpose of pension, under the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (2nd Amendment) Act, 2009.
In a landmark judgement and order dated 14.03.2017 in W.A. No. 5(K) of 2017, the Kohima Bench of Gauhati High Court, referring to the judgement and order dated 14.06.2012 passed in WP(C) No.270(IC) of 2011 and a batch of other writ petitions as well as the Order dated 20.07.2012 passed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 177/2012 alongwith a batch of other writ appeals, observed that “in view of the expressed provision defining public employment which does not distinguish between regular appointment and adhoc/contract/work-charged appointment for the purpose of retirement, period rendered on such basis has to be computed for the purpose of computation of 35 years of public employment”. The High Court also held that “having come to the finding that the Memorandum dated 01.08.2012 is not in consonance with the judicial pronouncement of this Court, the Office memorandum dated 01.08.2012 is of no consequence and we declare the same to be a nullity in law”.
Therefore, it has been decided that the period of service rendered on adhoc/contract/worlc-charged/substitute basis which is followed by regularization or regular appointment without break or any gap in service except resignation but notwithstanding die cases of resignations taken up with proper permission for another appointment, shall be treated as public employment and included in computation of length of service for the purpose of pension under the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (2nd Amendment) Act, 2009.
This supersedes told office memoranda on the subject including the P&AR Department memorandum dated 1st August, 2012.
