ACAUT Nagaland has expressed support to Nagaland NET Qualified Forum (NNQF) over writ petitions (WP)no.12(K)/2019 and 62(K)/2019, and the representation to Minister of Higher Education Imna Along.
In a statement, ACAUT maintained that appointment to public post should be based on public advertisement to ensure equal opportunities to all qualified aspirants.
ACAUT recalled that in response to its Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in 2015 against the menace of backdoor appointments, the State government issued an Office Memorandum (OM) on June 6, 2016 banning appointment on contract basis and thus the PIL was disposed.
ACAUT again filed a WP in 2017 challenging Office Memorandums (OMs) of August 4, 2008 and August 11, 2016, and in response, the court through an interim order of July 28, 2017 prevented regularisation of those contractual or ad hoc appointees after three years of service.
Then the court by an order on August 3, 2018, declared OMs of August 4, 2008 and August 11, 2016 as “unconstitutional” and directed the State government not to regularise any contractual or ad hoc appointee’s service, while giving relaxation that the government could take recourse under the cover of para 53 of Umadevi (3) case.
ACAUT said the State government interestingly, filed a Writ Appeal (WA) challenging the order, but a Division Bench on February 7, 2019 upheld the earlier judgement and dismissed the appeal.
It also mentioned that the court on June 6, 2022 dismissed the WPs filed by NNQF without taking into cognizance the merit of the case on the grounds of maintainability and locus standi, while giving liberty to the petitioners “…to make challenge the illegal or irregular action/actions by filing appropriate petition, as would be required under law.”
At the recent assembly session, ACAUT said it was “totally uncalled for” that NPF legislator Kuzholuzo (Azo) Nienu, knowing fully well that “more than 200 assistant professors, who were made respondents in the WPs, were appointed through backdoor with more than 100 not having adequate qualifications”, had raised the issue by questioning minister Imna Along as to why those assistant professors had not been regularised.
ACAUT also questioned the ‘dubious claim’ made by Along that the respondent assistant professors’ had won the case by misinterpreting the court order. ACAUT said this could invite contempt of court. Therefore, ACAUT said the “staged gimmick” was obvious since election was knocking at the door and so, appeasement for electoral gains cannot be ruled out.
ACAUT disclosed that NNQF aspirants were taking appropriate steps to challenge the illegal/irregular appointments by filing appropriate petition. It cautioned that any action on the part of the Department of Higher Education to regularise the services of those who were initially appointed without advertisement through Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC) would amount to defiance of Supreme Court’s landmark judgement in Umadevi’s case and its WP.
ANATG issue: ACAUT said it also found it amusing at the double standard of the Department of School Education (DoSE) on the issue of non-regularisation of All Nagaland Ad hoc Teachers Group-2015 (ANATG-2015). ACAUT said on one hand, DoSE quoted ACAUT’s writ petition and its inability to regularise the ad hoc teachers, but on the other hand, it continues with rampant backdoor appointments. ACAUT therefore, demanded that DoSE make it public as to how many appointments had been made without advertisement till date since the July 28, 2017 order.
ACAUT demanded to know as to whether the Department of Higher Education was applying the same yardstick as DoSE without fear or favour. ACAUT also clarified that ANATG-2015 issue had not been impleaded in the court case.
ACAUT said it was a well-known fact that politician-bureaucrat nexus resulted in backdoor appointments in almost all departments even after the landmark judgements of Supreme Court and High Court.
ACAUT claimed that as per the High Court order of August 3, 2018 any qualified aspirant was the aggrieved petitioner with locus standi to take any State department to court for redressal of backdoor appointment menace. It said the Department of Higher Education was looked upon by citizens as an intellectual institution and as a benchmark for quality and excellence with impartiality for selecting the most competent and qualified assistant professors through open competitions.
ACAUT asserted that it stood for appointments through due process of law based on fair competition and meritocracy in the interest of future generation.