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.