Nagaland to get permanent bar exam centre
Morung Express News
Dimapur | June 14
In a series of recent orders and judgments, the Gauhati High Court's Kohima Bench recorded the settlement of a long-running church dispute, upheld the dismissal of a Nagaland Rural Bank (NRB) employee in a fund misappropriation case, and disposed of a public interest litigation after the Bar Council of India (BCI) agreed to establish a permanent All India Bar Examination (AIBE) centre in Nagaland.
Church dispute ends with ‘amicable’ settlement
A division bench comprising Justice Manish Choudhury and Justice Pranjal Das on June 10 recorded that disputes involved in three connected writ appeals had been amicably settled through an agreement signed on March 30, 2026.
The litigation stemmed from a dispute dating back to 2017, when the Assemblies of God of East India (AGEI) initiated disciplinary action against a Reverend over a controversy surrounding a church foundation-laying ceremony in Wokha district. It culminated in the suspension of ministerial credentials and excommunication from the church.
According to the settlement agreement placed before the Court, AGEI and the respondents held reconciliation meetings on March 6 and March 10, 2026, following which both sides agreed to withdraw the pending litigation in a spirit of “forgiveness, reconciliation and unity.” The parties also agreed not to pursue or refile the same matter in future.
The Court directed that the settlement agreement and related correspondence be retained as part of the case records.
The appeals arose from a common judgment delivered on December 22, 2023, in which Justice Lanusungkum Jamir held that the Reverend had been suspended and excommunicated without being afforded an opportunity of hearing, in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court accordingly quashed both orders.
However, the Court did not enter into the theological or doctrinal issues at the centre of the dispute. Instead, it expressed hope that the parties would resolve their differences in a Christian spirit of “forgive and forget,” noting the wider ramifications of the conflict on believers and members of AG Church, Wokha.
Nagaland to get permanent AIBE centre
Meanwhile, on the same day, the division bench also disposed of a PIL seeking the establishment of a permanent examination centre for the AIBE in Nagaland.
The petition was filed by three practising advocates who contended that the absence of an examination centre in the State compelled law graduates and advocates to travel outside Nagaland to take the mandatory examination required for legal practice.
During the proceedings, the Court was informed that an AIBE-2026 examination centre had already been established in Kohima, where 56 candidates appeared for the test held on June 7.
The Court also took note of an affidavit filed by the BCI undertaking that a permanent AIBE centre would be made available in Nagaland from the next examination onwards.
In view of the assurance and the redressal of the immediate grievance, the Court disposed of the PIL.
Dismissal of bank employee upheld
In another judgment delivered on June 11, Justice Manish Choudhury dismissed a writ petition filed by a former NRB employee challenging his removal from service following a departmental inquiry into allegations of unauthorised transactions and misappropriation of customer and office funds.
The petitioner, who was appointed as a Clerk-cum-Cashier in 2007 and later served as an Office Assistant (Multi-Purpose), was functioning as Branch In-Charge of the Bank's Chiephobozou Branch when the alleged irregularities occurred.
According to the judgment, the employee was suspended in August 2017 after the Bank detected a series of irregular transactions, including unauthorised debits from customers' accounts, diversion of funds, misuse of office accounts and transfers of money into accounts operated by him or through third parties. The transactions involved individual customers, village development boards and a church, among others.
The employee challenged the disciplinary proceedings on multiple grounds, alleging coercion by bank authorities, lack of jurisdiction of the disciplinary authority and non-supply of the enquiry report before the dismissal order was issued.
The Court, however, rejected the contentions, observing that the employee had admitted to most of the allegations during the disciplinary proceedings and had acknowledged repaying the amounts involved. It further held that the Chairman of the Bank was competent to act as disciplinary authority in the absence of a General Manager and found no procedural illegality warranting judicial interference.
Emphasising that banking institutions function on public trust and require the highest standards of integrity from employees handling public funds, the Court held that the penalty of removal from service was justified and dismissed the petition.
.jpg)
