JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate appearing for all the State respondents. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner who was appointed as LDA on casual basis under the establishment of Phek Government College at Phek, Nagaland in the scale pay of Rs. 3050-75-3950-80-4590/- P.M. and, all other allowances as prescribed by the Government from time to time. The petitioner having served in the same post which is substantive vacant post, for the last 11(eleven) years, without any break in service has come to this Court praying for issuance of appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents for regularisation of his service, in terms of the Office Memorandum No. AR-3/GEN-201/2009 dated 17.03.2015, which provides for scheme for regularisation and absorption of Work charge and causal employees and Revision of pay/wages. The criteria for eligibility under the scheme is given at para-1 (i) of the said Memorandum. The same is given herein below:- “(i) All existing scheme work-charged and causal employees of various Departments who are enjoying scale pay and who have completed 30 (thirty) years or more continuous service as on 01.01.2015 will be regularized by conversion of their posts into regular ones, personal to them and subject to fulfillment of conditions below.” 2. It would be seen from the above given portion of the Office Memorandum that only a Work-charge or causal employee who is enjoying scale pay and having completed minimum 30(thirty) years of continuous service is eligible for regularisation under the scheme. But in the case of the petitioner it has been submitted that he has completed only 11 (eleven) years of continuous service. Keeping in view of what has been stated above one fails to find how the petitioner can benefit from the said scheme as given in the Office Memorandum. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner on that ground alone cannot be allowed. Keeping in view of what has been stated above one fails to find how the petitioner can benefit from the said scheme as given in the Office Memorandum. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner on that ground alone cannot be allowed. The fear of the petitioner as expressed by his learned counsel that since the post in which he has been serving till today has been advertised for direct recruitment and, in the event another person is recruited to the post he may not have a clear vacant post to which he can be regularise as and when he is eligible under the Office Memorandum appears to be due to lack of full understanding of the scheme itself. The contains of the (i) of para-1 of the Office Memorandum, particularly, the following portion of the sentence i.e. “will be regularised on conversion of their posts into regular ones personnel to them”, in my opinion makes it crystal clear that for regularization of a Work-charge or causal employee who have served for 30(thirty) or more years continuously would be brought about by converting the post that he or she has been holding into regular post. As such, for regularisation of a Work-charge or causal employee under the scheme does not or would not depend on existence of a regular vacant post. Therefore, the fear or apprehension of the petitioner is without any basis. Having said so, however, it is up to the Government to either keep the post, to which the petitioner is at present serving, so that he may continue serving in it and, regularise him in the same post, as and when, he attains the eligibility criteria or, to fill up the same but let the petitioner continue with the same pay and allowances and regularise him in terms of the scheme, as stated above, as and when he attains the eligibility criteria. With the above conclusion and observations, this writ petition stands disposed.