The directorate of School Education of Nagaland is virtually being held hostage by thousands of agitating teachers for more than two months demanding redress for their rights from the state’s government. On the other hand, the future of the children has been sandwiched between the conflict that emerged out of a poor recruitment policy from the government and the consequential affront from the ones they employed. We may concur that it is high time for a paradigm shift to tackle the colossal mess.
The state’s education department subtly disclosing its inability to regularise the ad hoc teachers—and rightly so—looking at the already surplus teachers in one hand and thousands of eager aspirants already barging in through the door seeking employment, on the other. The department in concern ought to have tweaked its mode and condition concerning the recruitment procedure.
However, if we were to delve further, the demands of the agitating teachers may hold no water considering the Supreme Court’s judgment passed in the Uma Devi & Others vs Secretary of State of Karnataka pertaining to appointments to government offices. The landmark judgment ruled that it was against Article 16 of the Constitution of India in making appointments to government offices without a proper recruitment policy or without having floated open advertisements. The Right to Life as stated in Article 21 for casual and contractual employees was also observed by the court. But the court noted that precedence must have to be given to deserving aspirants who were deprived of jobs.
The government of Nagaland is unable to take any decision because of the Stay on the PIL filed by the Acaut and the PSAN against irregular appointments, although the demand was only for those in the pay scale of 2800 and over. This is because the Supreme Court’s judgment encompasses all kinds of employment in public offices but not necessarily pertaining to jobs within a certain pay scale.
With the hands of the current system already tied by undertaking of its predecessor, it needs a strong resolution from the government to resolve the issue tactfully. The reason is this: Every agreement in regard to the issue between the parties, both previous and present, becomes negated within the ambit of the law.
Before the growing anger and frustration brew out of control, the government needs to delve further than simply scratching the surface of the anathema— it has somehow contagiously corrupted and infected every known system prevailing in the state starting from the pedestal of the governmental hierarchy to the social organisations.
