Re-employment policy
- Hueiyen Lanpao Editorial :: September 17, 2014 -
The recent ruling of the High Court of Manipur that quashed the service extension or re-engagement or retention of Dr Akoijam Bijoy Singh as the Director of Health Services after retirement on superannuation on February 28 last is surely going to a wide ramification on the existing policy of not just of the Government of Manipur but also in other States regarding service extension or re-engagement of retired employees to substantive posts.
Acting on a writ petition filed by Dr Kangujam Rajo Singh, who is the Additional Director of Health and Family Welfare with Advocate Dr RK Deepak Singh as the petitioner’s counsel, Chief Justice of High Court of Manipur Laxmi Kanta Mohapatra on September 2 not only quashed the service extension of Dr Bijoy as the Director of Health Services by the Government of Manipur after his retirement on superannuation but also ruled that such re-employment of retired person to substantive post is in violation of the Fundamental Rule-56 (d), which clearly states that ‘no Government servant shall be granted extension in service beyond the age of retirement of sixty years’ in view of the fact that such extension blocks the chances of other qualified employees from getting their due promotions.
Of course, under the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh proviso of Fundamental Rule 56 (d), service extension or re-engagement or retention after retirement may be granted in public interest to certain categories of Government servants like those dealing with budget work or working as a full-time Member of a Committee which is to be wound up within a short period of time; a Specialist in medical or scientific fields; eminent scientist of international stature; Cabinet Secretary, Defence Secretary, Home Secretary in the Central Government, etc.
But the pertinent question that has come to the forth in the light of the High Court ruling against the service extension of Dr Bijoy, who obviously does not fall under any of these special categories for ‘expressed need for their services’, is the misuse of the Government policy for service extension or re-engagement or retention of retired employees to substantive posts.
At present, there are a number of such cases of service extension of retired employees in various Departments under the Government of Manipur, with some getting the favour not just once or twice, but five times; not because of any ‘expressed need for their services’ to the Government and the people but mainly by virtue of their right connection with the right people.
Thus, the Government policy for re-employment has been reduced to just a convenient ‘pick and choose policy’ to benefit the political favourites at the cost of many other hard working employees who are expecting their due promotions.
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.