Page No.# 1/5 GAHC020002962026 2026:GAU-NL:374 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/70/2026 SHRI SERILI SANGTAM S/O THSAPISE SANGTAM, R/O P.O. SEYOCHUNG, OLD MONGER VILLAGE, KIPHIRE SADAR, KIPHIRE, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND ANR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND, KOHIMA 2:THE DIRECTOR EMPLOYMENT SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND ENTERPRENEURSHIP KOHIMA NAGALAND - 79700 Advocate for the Petitioner : SENTIYANGER, IMLIMENLA IMCHEN,KEVISERIENUO,YUKHAKOKLA,MAONGKALA,NOCKLEI M KONYAK,WAPANGLEMLA,KONLI BUCHEM Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 23-06-2026 Heard Mr. Sentiyanger, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Bichano Kithan, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents. 2. Having regard to the nature of grievance projected by the petitioner, the writ petition is taken up for disposal. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed vide Office order dated 18.07.2017, issued by the Director, Directorate of Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Nagaland, Kohima. The said appointment was made against the vacancy created by the resignation of the earlier incumbent. Accordingly, the petitioner has been serving diligently in the said post and his services have been extended from time to time. According to the petitioner, the last extension given to him was vide Office order dated 04.03.2023, by which his service was extended for a period of 1 (one) year w.e.f. 01.03.2023 to 28.02.2024. As there was no further extension, the petitioner served as Computer Operator till 28.02.2024. According to the petitioner, despite having rendered his service, he has not been paid his salary w.e.f. March 2022 to February, 2024 which has accumulated to a total amount of Rs. 1,68,000/- (Rupees one lakh sixty eight thousand only). Page No.# 3/5 4. Aggrieved with the same, the petitioner approached the Director, Directorate of Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Nagaland, Kohima by filing his representation on 09.04.2026. The said authority in turn forwarded the same to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima on 08.05.2026, for consideration. 5. Mr. Sentiyanger, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the representation of the petitioner was not considered by the Director, Directorate of Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Nagaland, Kohima, he has filed the instant writ petition. However, after filing of the counter affidavit by the respondent nos. 1 and 2, the petitioner has come to learn that his representation was forwarded to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima on 08.05.2026, by the said Director. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner could not have been deprived of his salary, considering the fact that his appointment although on temporary basis was against the vacancy caused by the earlier incumbent and that the salary is considered as a non planned expenditure, as indicated in the appointment order. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that the respondents cannot deprive the petitioner from payment of his salary for the services he has rendered. 6. He submits that the Apex Court in the case of Man Singh Vs. Page No.# 4/5 State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary and Ors reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 726, in the given facts of the case held that even if the appointment of an employee is found to be irregular, the employee having discharged the duties is to be paid for the services rendered. He, therefore, submits that even if the respondent authorities are of the view that the appointment of the petitioner was not authorized, they would still be liable to pay him for the services rendered. 7. Having regard to the above projection and considering the fact that the representation of the petitioner is not yet considered and disposed of till date, the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima shall consider the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same, by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. The petitioner shall also furnish the authority a copy of the writ petition with annexures. 8. It is further clarified that although the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima is not arrayed as a party respondent in the writ petition but the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent nos. 1 and 2 shows that the representation has been forwarded by the Director, Directorate of Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Nagaland, Page No.# 5/5 Kohima, to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima and therefore the direction of this Court. 9. The order to be passed by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Labour & Employment, Skill Development & Entrepreneurship Department, Nagaland, Kohima shall be communicated to the petitioner. 10. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant