‘File contempt case if interim order was violated’: Gauhati HC on Cabinet order

The Gauhati High Court Kohima Bench on Thursday heard arguments in the ongoing case challenging the regularization of Assistant Professors in Nagaland, with the latest focus turning sharply toward the Nagaland Cabinet’s controversial decision on December 17, 2024, which absorbed 147 contractual teachers into regular posts.

Though the case has been under litigation since 2022, Thursday’s hearing primarily revolved around the recent cabinet move to regularize the appointments—a decision made while the appointments themselves remain sub judice.

“Were they appointed as per any advertisements? How can they be regularized by a cabinet decision?” questioned Justice Suman Shyam.

One of the counsels representing the respondents defended the move by stating, “This was done as a one-time dispensation as they had been serving in the department for almost 10 years.”

Justice Shyam, however, pressed further: “These private respondents?”

“With the condition that the requisite qualification should be done within a period of five years. They have not qualified NET so within five years?” the defendant responded.

When informed that the Cabinet decision was made on September 12, 2024, the Court observed that the decision itself had not been challenged yet in the ongoing case. The petitioners’ counsel pointed out that the regularization was carried out despite the High Court’s interim order dated December 16, 2022, which had directed against such moves.

“So, you’re saying they acted in contempt of court?… you have to file a contempt case,” said Justice Shyam.

Citing Mukul Saikia vs State of Assam, Justice Shyam cautioned that without challenging the cabinet decision directly, the writ petition might be dismissed. “Only if the cabinet decision goes, the writ petition will come,” he stated.

He advised the petitioner’s counsel to file a contempt of court proceeding: “When there is an interim order and it has been violated, you should have filed a contempt of court. You must file proper proceedings.”

Justice Shyam noted that 147 individuals, including the private respondents, have been absorbed through the Cabinet’s order. “These matters have to be clasped together and heard,” he said.

He further warned that if the Cabinet decision is not kept in abeyance or challenged in time, the petitioners could lose the opportunity to do so. “If the cabinet memorandum is not under challenge, gone, over—can’t help it. If you cannot challenge, it cannot be helped,” Justice Shyam remarked.

The next hearing of the case is scheduled for May 26, 2025.

Meanwhile, outside the Directorate of Higher Education, members of the Combined Technical Association of Nagaland (CTAN) and the Nagaland NET Qualified Forum (NNQF) staged a protest over the same issue. In a symbolic gesture, they held a memorial service for meritocracy, accusing the government of undermining fair recruitment practices through backdoor regularization.

MT