Government Moves to Resolve RMSA Teachers' Pay Dispute and CIH Staff Regularisation

Kohima, India Aug 23, 2026 ALN: Moa Jamir
Kohima | August 22

A long-pending dispute over scale pay and arrears for RMSA teachers moved closer to a possible resolution after the Government assured the Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench (GHCKB), that the matter would be placed before the State Cabinet for approval to comply with the Court’s directions.

The RMSA case was among a series of matters dealt with in recent proceedings before the GHCKB, including the regularisation of contractual employees at the Central Institute of Horticulture (CIH), Medziphema, pension entitlement, national highway projects, the Indigenous Inhabitant PIL and service-related appointments.

RMSA teachers’ pay case
In the latest hearing on August 20, the GHCKB recorded the Advocate General's assurance that the matter concerning the grant of scale pay and cumulative arrears to RMSA teachers would be taken up by the State Cabinet, following which approval would be accorded to comply with the Court's directions.

The personal appearance of the Department of School Education’s Commissioner & Secretary and Principal Director, as well as the State Mission Director of Samagra Shiksha, was accordingly dispensed with until further orders.

Justice Yarenjungla Longkumer listed the matter for September 29 and directed the respondents to produce the compliance order on that date.

CIH issue: HC grants two months to comply
A Division Bench comprising Justice Devashis Baruah and Justice Longkumer on August 19 granted the Union government and other authorities two months to comply with its April 7, 2026 judgment directing the regularisation of two long-serving contractual employees of the CIH, Medziphema.

The extension was granted after the Union of India and three others, including the CIH Director, informed the Court that they had challenged the April 7 judgment before the Supreme Court, which declined to interfere with the High Court's ruling on August 3. The Division Bench made it clear that no further extension would be allowed.

The April 7 judgment had upheld the regularisation of two employees engaged as Technical Consultants at CIH in 2006 and 2007, whose contracts were repeatedly extended, but discontinued from 2023 following the engagement of UPSC-selected candidates.

The two subsequently approached the High Court seeking regularisation. The Union government opposed their claim, maintaining that their appointments were purely contractual and that regularisation would amount to backdoor entry into Group A posts.

The Division Bench, however, noted that they had undergone a selection process and served for long periods against sanctioned posts, relying on the Supreme Court's 2026 Bholanath ruling against prolonged contractual employment.

It also upheld interference with UPSC No. 05/2023 in respect of the two posts, while limiting consequential service benefits from November 27, 2024, rather than from their initial appointments.

Invalid pension claim upheld
The GHCKB on August 20 also held that the claim of a retired NAP constable for invalid pension was admissible in law and directed the Director General of Police to consider his pending representation within four months.

The constable, who was enlisted in 2008 and served for over seven-and-a-half years, resigned in 2015 on account of a medical disability. A Medical Board had certified that he suffered from 40% visual disability.

The State opposed the claim, citing a 2015 Office Memorandum requiring 10 years of service for invalid pension.

However, Justice Khaund held that the executive instruction could not override Rule 38 of the CCS Pension Rules, which does not prescribe such a qualifying service period.

The Court also held that the claim was not defeated by delay, though any arrears would be governed by Supreme Court principles.

NH-29 and NH-329A matters
The State government and the National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd (NHIDCL) have filed fresh affidavits on the status of works along NH-29, including the Jotsoma bypass-Lerie Welcome Gate stretch, Package-III works, widening of the riverbed under Package-I, and maintenance under Packages I and II. The matter is listed for further hearing on August 27.

In a separate case, the State government informed the Court on August 19 that it would file a compliance affidavit on an earlier direction for public notices to identify unresolved land and boundary disputes along the proposed Right of Way on NH-329A.

The PIL concerns the implementation of the High Court's 2021 direction to construct, expand and maintain NH-329A as a National Highway.

APO-NTC PILs: State finally files affidavit
The Government has finally filed its affidavit-in-opposition in the PIL filed by the Angami Public Organisation (APO) and Tribes Council (NTC), challenging the State's 2025 notifications relating to “Indigenous Inhabitants of” and Indigenous Inhabitant Certificates (IICs).

The PIL challenges the June 3 and June 10, 2025 notifications, including provisions relating to persons who settled in before December 1, 1963, and their descendants.

During the August 19 hearing, the Additional Advocate General informed the Court that the affidavit-in-opposition had been filed. It is now listed for further hearing on September 23.

CDPOs appeal dismissed
A Division Bench of the GHCKB on August 18 dismissed a writ appeal filed by 22 officials of the Department of Social Welfare challenging the contractual appointments and subsequent regularisation of several Child Development Project Officers (CDPOs) and equivalent officers.

The Court upheld the December 22, 2023 order of a Single Judge, which had dismissed the original petition on the grounds of delay, laches and lack of locus standi.

The appellants had challenged appointments made between 2008 and 2013 and their subsequent regularisation, claiming that these affected their promotional prospects and seniority. The Court noted that the challenge was brought years after the appointments.

It also held that the appellants belonged to the promotional stream, while the officers concerned were appointed against the direct recruitment quota.

Under the applicable rules, 50% of the posts were earmarked for direct recruitment and 50% for departmental promotion.

The Court held that the appointments had not affected the appellants' promotional prospects and noted that most had already been promoted to CDPO and equivalent posts.

Meanwhile, the High Court on August 20 continued its interim order in the criminal case involving former University professor Sarat Chandra Yenisetti, allowing the trial to proceed but restraining the trial court from disposing of the case pending his criminal petition. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund extended the order until September 18.