Nagaland govt to review staff over 50 or with 20 years service

‘Ineffective’ or ‘doubtful integrity’ employees may face premature retirement under new half-yearly review system

The Government of Nagaland has issued a formal notification outlining the framework for periodic review and premature retirement of government servants under the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 1991.

The notification, issued by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Administrative Reforms Branch), states that any government employee who has either attained the age of 50 or completed 20 years of service may be retired in “public interest” if found to be ineffective or of “doubtful integrity.” The policy is grounded under Section 3(3) of the 1991 Act, aligned with provisions of Fundamental Rule (FR) 56(1), and is not considered a punitive measure but an administrative action.

According to the Office Memorandum (OM), the policy aims “to strengthen the administrative machinery by developing responsible and efficient administration at all levels” and enhance “efficiency, economy and speedy disposal of government functions.”

Integrity and effectiveness under review
The broad criteria for identifying government servants for premature retirement include:
· Doubtful integrity
· Ineffectiveness in performance
· Unsatisfactory service records, especially over the past five years

The government clarified that a sudden and steep fall in competence may also be grounds for premature retirement, even if the individual is due for superannuation within a year. However, employees with consistently satisfactory service in recent years are likely to be retained unless integrity concerns arise.

Department-wise review committees
The memorandum mandates that each department must maintain a register of employees approaching the 50-year age mark or having completed 20 years of service. Review Committees will be constituted twice a year — from January to June and July to December — to assess eligible employees.

For Group A and B gazetted officers, the Review Committee will be headed by an officer nominated by the Chief Secretary. For Group C and D employees, the concerned departmental Additional Head of Department (AHOD) will head the committee with another member nominated by the Chief Secretary.

All departments are required to prepare comprehensive summaries of the service records of eligible employees, including Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) and performance appraisals, for the committee’s review.

Broad criteria for review
The Review Committee follows these broad criteria when recommending premature retirement:

1. Government servants with doubtful integrity will be retired.
2. Government servants found ineffective will also be recommended for retirement. The key factor here is their fitness and competence to continue in their current post.
3. No government servant will ordinarily be retired for ineffectiveness if they are within one year of superannuation unless there is a sudden and steep decline in their performance.
4. Government servants with satisfactory service records over the preceding five years, or since promotion to their highest post within that period, should not be retired for ineffectiveness.
5. There is no such restriction for retirement on grounds of doubtful integrity.
6. In cases where promotion was based on seniority-cum-fitness rather than merit, earlier service records prior to promotion may be reviewed.
7. The entire service record will be considered during the review, not just the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) or Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs). Personal files, work handled, reports prepared, and even uncommunicated remarks in ACRs/APARs may be examined.

Right to representation
Government servants served with a notice of premature retirement have the right to appeal. Representations must be submitted within three weeks from the date of notice. These will be reviewed by a separate Representation Committee, which will forward its recommendations to the Appropriate Authority within a fixed timeline.

The OM specifies that “all departments are requested to follow the contents of this Office Memorandum strictly for compliance.”

MT