Morung Express News
Kohima | May 22
The Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court (GHCKB) on May 22 upheld the termination of two contractual Junior Soil Conservation Officers (JSCOs) in the Soil & Water Conservation (SWC) Department, Nagaland.
In a common judgment, Justice Yarenjungla Longkumer dismissed the two writ petitions, holding that contractual employees appointed pending recruitment through the Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC) do not acquire a vested right to continue in service merely on account of long years of service.
The two petitioners had challenged the termination of their services by the SWC Department through a notification dated March 12, 2024.
The Court held that the petitioners had accepted the contractual appointments with full knowledge that their services would cease once regular recruitment through the NPSC was completed.
Main contentions
According to court records, the petitioners were appointed as JSCOs on June 3, 2016 on contractual basis against sanctioned posts in the SWC Department. Their services were extended periodically for over seven years, with the latest extension running till September 30, 2024.
They challenged the termination, contending that the action was arbitrary and influenced by pressure from the Combined Technical Association of Nagaland (CTAN), which had reportedly demanded their removal and threatened to lock down the department office.
The petitioners also argued that vacant JSCO posts still existed in the department and that their termination could not be justified on the ground that NPSC recruits had occupied the posts they held.
Relying on RTI replies and PIMS records, they claimed that out of 44 sanctioned JSCO posts, 34 had been filled through the NPSC, six had been requisitioned, and four remained vacant. They further argued that they were terminated without notice or an opportunity of hearing, amounting to violation of principles of natural justice.
The State government, however, maintained that the appointments were purely temporary and contractual in nature and expressly subject to termination upon regular recruitment through the NPSC.
The government relied on the original appointment orders and subsequent extension orders, particularly a June 22, 2022 order which stated that the posts had already been requisitioned to the NPSC and that “once the post is recruited through NPSC the incumbents will be terminated automatically.”
It also rejected the petitioners’ reliance on PIMS codes, stating that such codes are allotted to all categories of employees, including contractual and casual workers, for administrative and salary purposes and do not confer regular employee status.
On the issue of vacant posts, the State clarified that the four vacancies cited by the petitioners arose later due to promotions in 2025 and had already been requisitioned to the NPSC.
Court’s reasoning
After examining the pleadings and records, the Court observed that while contractual employees are protected against arbitrary or mala fide termination, their rights remain limited to the terms of their contracts and constitutional protections under Articles 14 and 16.
The Court noted that the petitioners were aware since at least June 2022 that their posts had already been requisitioned to the NPSC and that termination upon regular recruitment would be automatic. Rejecting the claim of violation of natural justice, it held that no separate hearing was necessary in view of the explicit contractual conditions accepted by the petitioners.
The Court also found no evidence of illegality, perversity, irrationality, mala fide intent or unfairness in the termination order.
Holding that contractual appointees engaged pending regular recruitment can legitimately be replaced by regularly selected candidates, the Court dismissed both petitions as “devoid of merit.”
