Page No.# 1/8 GAHC020008202024 2026:GAU-NL:276 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/304/2024 SHRI PRABIN DAS S/O SHRI LALIT CHANDRA DAS PRESENTLY SERVING AS MARKETING SPECIALIST CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF HORTICULTURE MEDZIPHEMA CHUMOUKEDIMA NAGALAND VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE KRISH BHAWAN NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE HORTICULTURE COMMISSIONER DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE GOVT. OF INDIA KRISH BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110001 3:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (HORT-FRUIT) DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE GOVT. OF INDIA KRISHI BHAWAN-NEW DELHI-110001 4:THE DIRECTOR CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF HORTICULTURE DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE Page No.# 2/8 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE MEDZIPHEMA CHUMOUKEDIMA NAGALAND ------------ Advocate for : T. B. JAMIR Advocate for : CGSC appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Date:-19-05-2026 Heard Mr. T. B. Jamir, learned counsel along with Mr. I. Jamir, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Deka, learned CGSC along with Ms. K. Tsukru, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner in the present proceeding has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to regularize his services against the post of Marketing Specialist, in the Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema. 3. The Director, Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema, i.e., the respondent no. 4, herein, had issued an advertisement for recruitment amongst others, against the post of Marketing Specialist on contractual basis, for a period of 6 months or till regular appointment is made against the said post. The post of Marketing Specialist as advertised was a sanctioned post. The petitioner having fulfilled the requisite eligibility criteria as set out in the said advertisement dated 13.02.2009, had submitted his application, and Page No.# 3/8 thereafter, participated in a selection process conducted for the purpose of engagement against the post of Marketing Specialist, as advertised. 4. In pursuance of the said selection process, the Selection Committee as constituted for that matter, selected the petitioner for engagement against the post of Marketing Specialist, and the said recommendation was placed before the competent authority of the Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema. The recommendation of the Selection Committee was, thereafter, forwarded by the Respondent no. 4, to the Horticulture Commissioner, Department of Agriculture & Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, for approval. On approval being so granted by the competent authority, the respondent no. 4, issued an offer of appointment dated 27.11.2009, to the petitioner, herein, for his engagement against the post of Marketing Specialist, on contractual basis. The petitioner accepted the said engagement and joined his services. The petitioner on joining such engagement was paid his remuneration on fixed pay basis. Although, the initial engagement of the petitioner was for a period of 6 (six) months, the same was extended from time to time, along with the revision of the wages drawn by the petitioner against the said post. 5. The post of Marketing Specialist being a sanctioned post, a process of recruitment was initiated against the said post vide issuance of advertisement No. 02/2023 dated 28.01.2023, by the Union Public Services Commission (UPSC). The petitioner along with Page No.# 4/8 124 others had submitted their respective applications for recruitment against the said post. On a scrutiny of the applications received, it is found that only the petitioner and one another came to be shortlisted for selection against the said post. However, vide communication dated 15.07.2024, the Union Public Services Commission (UPSC), authorities decided not to proceed with the selection process as initiated in the matter any further, and it was held that the recruitment against the post of Marketing Specialist/Economist, as advertised by the advertisement dated 28.01.2023 had become infructuous. 6. The petitioner, accordingly, continued against the said post, however, on contractual basis. It is to be noted that the petitioner along with other similarly situated employees engaged on contractual basis against various other posts in the Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema, had submitted representations before the respondent authorities praying for regularization of their services, against the post held by them. However, the said prayer, not being considered favourably, the petitioner has approached this Court praying for relief, as noticed herein above. 7. At this stage, this Court would notice that similarly situated persons engaged on contractual basis like the petitioner, in Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema, had approached this Court earlier by way of instituting writ petitions being WP(C)/38/2023 (Shri. Arvind Singh Vs. The Union of India and 4 Ors) and WP(C)/39/2023 (Shri. Anjani Kumar Singh Vs, The Union of India Page No.# 5/8 and 4 Ors). A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 27.11.2024, on considering the issues arising in the said writ petitions was pleased to dispose of the said writ petitions by directing the respondent authorities to regularize the services of the petitioners, involved in the above noted two writ petitions. The respondents, herein, being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order dated 27.11.2024, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023, had assailed the same by way of instituting writ appeals being WA/12/2025 and WA/13/2025. The Division Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 07.03.2026, on a consideration of the issues arising in the said writ appeals, proceeded to dispose of the said writ appeals, affirming the Judgment and Order dated 27.11.2024, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023, however, with certain modifications, therein. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, as well as the Division Bench of this Court, has submitted that the said decisions squarely covers the case of the petitioner in the present proceeding, and accordingly, a direction would be mandated to be issued to the respondent authorities to regularize the service of the petitioner, herein. 9. Mr. B. Deka, learned CGSC, appearing for the respondents, has fairly not disputed the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the matter, and has submitted that the petitioner is also similarly placed like the petitioners in WP(C)/38/2023 and Page No.# 6/8 WP(C)/39/2023. 10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, and considered the materials coming on record. 11. The petitioner, herein, was admittedly engaged against the sanctioned vacant post of Marketing Specialist w.e.f. the date of initial engagement i.e., 27.11.2009. The petitioner is found to have been constantly discharging his duties against the said post, on contractual basis. The petitioners in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023, are also found to have been recruited against sanctioned post in the Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema, on contractual basis. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 27.11.2024, had disposed of the said writ petitions by directing the respondent authorities to regularize the services of the said two writ petitioners from the date of their initial appointment. The said Judgment and Order was assailed by the respondent authorities, herein, before the Division Bench of this Court by way of instituting writ appeals being WA/12/2025 and WA/13/2025. The Division Bench of this Court upon considering the issues arising in the said writ appeals, was pleased, vide Judgment and Order dated 07.03.2026, to dispose of the said writ appeals by directing as follows:- “34. The Judgment & Order dated 27.11.2024 in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023 stands modified as herein under: I. The appellants herein are directed to forthwith regularize the services of the Respondents herein against the sanctioned posts to which Page No.# 7/8 they were appointed. II. For the sake of clarity we observe that the petitioner in WP(C)/38/2023 shall be regularized against the sanctioned post of Assistant Horticulture Specialist and the petitioner in WP(C)/39/2023 shall be regularized against the sanctioned post of Horticulture Specialist. The Petitioners/Respondents herein shall be entitled to all consequential service benefits accruing from the date of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. III. Advertisement No. 05/2023 is interfered with only to the extent of filling up of the vacancy of one post of Horticulture Specialist in so far as Serial No. 2 (Vacancy No. 23030502311) and one post of Assistant Horticulture Specialist at Serial No. 3 (Vacancy No. 23030503311). The remaining posts advertised in the Advertisement being No. 05/2023 are not interfered with. IV. The process of regularization be completed within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of the present judgment.” 12. A perusal of the said conclusions drawn by the Division Bench of this Court, vide Judgment and Order dated 07.03.2026, would reveal that the direction for regularization of the services of the petitioner in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023, against the post held by them, in the Central Institute of Horticulture, Medziphema, as directed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court was upheld. However, it was provided that the regularization of the services of the petitioners, therein, would be from the date of Judgment and Order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, i.e., w.e.f. 07.03.2026. 13. Having considered the service status of the petitioner, herein, in the present proceeding, in the light of the decision of the Co- Page No.# 8/8 ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)/38/2023 and WP(C)/39/2023, as well as the decision of the Division Bench in WA/12/2025 and WA/13/2025, this Court is of the considered view that the said decisions would squarely apply to the case of the petitioner, herein, and the same was not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. 14. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent authorities shall pass appropriate orders towards regularizing the service of the petitioner, herein, against the post of Marketing Specialist within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is directed that the effect of regularization of services in respect of the petitioner, herein, against the post of Marketing Specialist, be so given effect w.e.f. today, i.e., 19.05.2026. 15. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant