RD deptt. counsel questions ‘maintainability’ of PIL: ACAUT

Nagaland Post: Kohima: Sunday, 24 January 2016.

ACAUT Nagaland on Saturday said that the Rural Development department’s counsel has questioned the “maintainability of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL)” filed by ACAUT Nagaland against the alleged backdoor appointments in the department.

Informing this, ACAUT co-convener Joel Nillo Naga said that the Rural Development (RD) department’s counsel had questioned the “maintainability” of the PIL that was filed by ACAUT Nagaland in last November.

Joel said that the first hearing was held in November 2015 and the second hearing was scheduled to be held on February 22 next.

ACAUT had highlighted several alleged backdoor appointments in various government departments by filing Right To Information (RTIs).

Based on RTI replies, ACAUT in the PIL said that out of 1316 appointments, a massive 1153 or 88% comprised of appointments made in total contravention of laws, rules, orders, procedures etc. enacted for governing public employment within the ambit of the constitution.

Despite several representations submitted to the government seeking action, ACAUT said that the government chose to remain silent on such serious issue.

In this regard, it said that the government’s silence compelled ACAUT to file PIL against ten departments Rural Development, Health and Family Welfare, Social Welfare, Home department, Nagaland Public Service Commission, Law & Justice, Accountant General, SCERT, Higher Education and Nagaland Public Works Department.

On the other hand, ACAUT said that the union Home secretary (Ministry of Home Affairs) was impleaded as a ‘party respondent’.

It may be mentioned that the ACAUT Nagaland had filed a PIL on corruption in public employment at Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench, on November 16, 2015 (PIL no – 11/2015).

ACAUT Nagaland said that the PIL was necessitated as the state government failed to take appropriate action despite the series of backdoor appointment exposés made by the ACAUT starting with RD department in the month of June 2015.

Initially, seven departments were made respondents and the Court had requested to direct the state chief secretary to furnish information on corruption in public employment from the rest of the departments.