Correspondent
KOHIMA, JUN 15 (NPN): Nagaland Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) 2016 Teachers’ Association has urged the state government to address their long pending demand and implement the scale of pay upheld by the courts.
Addressing press conference at Kohima Press Club on June 15, the association highlighted that teachers have been deprived of salaries for the past two months.
Spokesperson Renbemo L. Patton said it has been four years since the association won its case on March 16, 2022, yet the government has not implemented the pay scale. He recalled that teachers staged a protest last year but suspended it after receiving an assurance letter from the government on September 11, 2025, promising immediate implementation once the review petition was dismissed. The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition on January 15, 2026, but compliance has not followed.
Renbemo expressed dismay that despite the apex court’s ruling, the matter was again referred to the Advocate General, who advised that all legal remedies had been exhausted and the judgment must be implemented. He alleged that the Cabinet was attempting to find loopholes in a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court. Appealing for justice, he urged the government to comply with the directive and avoid confrontation, warning that continued delay could affect students with examinations scheduled from June 24.
Executive member Akabo S. Aye elaborated on the legal aspects, stating that the March 2022 judgment directed the government to grant RMSA teachers the pay scale under Pay Band Rs. 9,300–34,800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4,200 per month. He noted that the Supreme Court had dismissed both the Special Leave Petition in May 2025 and the review petition in January 2026, leaving no further legal recourse. Despite concurrence from the Finance and P&AR departments, implementation has not taken place even after two Cabinet meetings.
The association appealed to the government to respect the rights of teachers who have served for over a decade, stressing that their demand was not beyond entitlement but simply the enforcement of a judgment already upheld by the Supreme Court. They questioned the continued delay, asking where justice was to be found if court orders were not implemented.