JUDGMENT & ORDER : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. Heard Mr. Limawapang, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. Seponglemla Chang, learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the official respondents and Mr. Taka Kichu, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent no. 4. 2. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the Administrative approval given by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Kohima dated 11.12.2023, for appointment of the respondent no. 4 on landownership basis. The petitioner has also assailed that the subsequent Notification dated 13.12.2023 whereby the Principal Director, Department of School Education, Nagaland: Kohima/respondent no. 2 had issued the Appointment Order in favour of the respondent no. 4 as a Multi Tasking Staff (MTS) GR-IV at Government High School Phelungre under the establishment of the District Education Officer, Kiphire, under the Department of School Education. The merits in respect to the challenge so made by the petitioner can be ascertained only upon a narration of facts leading to the filing of the instant writ petition which is stated infra. 3. A vacancy of Chowkidar/MTS opened under the establishment of the Government High School Phelungre due to the voluntary retirement w.e.f. 31.08.2019, of one Shri Throngkiumong Sangtam, i.e., the father of the petitioner in the instant proceedings. The petitioner, who claims to be eligible, submitted his application for consideration of his case as an indigenous candidate of the said District. Along with the petitioner, two other candidates also submitted their applications, one of which is the private respondent no. 4. The application of the private respondent no. 4 for being appointed to the vacant post is on the basis of landownership, which is a policy of the State of Nagaland on the basis of a Notification issued on 05.03.2018. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire vide Communication dated 12.01.2023, forwarded a copy of the Minutes of the Meeting on the matter pertaining to the appointment of Chowkidar at Phelungre Government High School to the respondent no. 2. The Enclosure to the said Communication is the Report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Officer (C) HQ, Nagaland wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner’s application for the post of Chowkidar at Phelungre Government High School was on the basis of the retirement of Shri Throngkiumong Sangtam. It was further mentioned that the application of the respondent no. 2. The Enclosure to the said Communication is the Report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Officer (C) HQ, Nagaland wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner’s application for the post of Chowkidar at Phelungre Government High School was on the basis of the retirement of Shri Throngkiumong Sangtam. It was further mentioned that the application of the respondent no. 4 for the post of Chowkidar at Government High School, Phelungre was on the basis of landownership of the Staff Quarters located at the old School building, which is in use by the Department. It was mentioned in the said Report that as there was no written agreement nor terms and conditions with the Government could be produced, therefore, as the vacant post of Chowkidar for the Government High School building falls under the Community donated land, the issue of land-ownership should not arise. On the basis thereof, it was mentioned that the application of both the applicants for the post of Chowkidar be examined by the concerned Department and appointment be given on the basis of merit and not on the basis of landownership. 5. Basing upon the said Report submitted by the Sub Divisional Officer (C) HQ, Kiphire, the respondent no. 2 issued a Communication to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Department of School Education and SCERT whereby three names were forwarded. It was categorically mentioned in the said Communication dated 05.05.2023 that in view of the Report submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire issue of landownership does not arise. 6. However, pursuant thereto, on 11.12.2023, the Joint Secretary to the Government of Nagaland conveyed the Administrative Approval for appointment of the respondent no. 4 to the post of Chowkidar/MTS at Government High School Phelungre under the establishment of the District Education Officer, Phelungre, which is the subject matter of challenge in the instant proceedings. Subsequent thereto, the respondent no. 4 was appointed by the respondent no. 2 vide the impugned Notification dated 13.12.2023. 7. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court on the ground that there is a violation to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, in as much as if the landownership basis was not the issue, the respondent Authorities could not have issued the Administrative Approval as well as the Appointment Order which are impugned in the instant proceedings in favour of the respondent no. 4. 4. It is seen that pursuant to filing of the instant writ petition, notice was issued upon all the respondents. 8. The record reveals that pursuant to an Order passed by this Court on 04.04.2025 both the State respondents as well as the private respondent have filed their respective affidavits. In the affidavit filed by the State respondents, it was mentioned that pursuant to the Communication dated 05.05.2023, by the respondent no. 2 to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Nagaland Department of School Education and SCERT, the Department received a forwarding Letter dated 19.06.2023 from the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire along with the Enclosures. The Enclosures so submitted were:- a) Appeal dated 12.05.2023 from the respondent no. 4 requesting appointment to the post of Chowkidar at Government High School, Phelungre, b) Application Letter dated 23.03.2020 and 13.11.2022 from the Phelungre Village Council recommending the respondent no. 4 for the post of Chowkidar at Government High School, Phelungre based on land-ownership, c) Affidavit on land agreement (Staff Quarters) signed on 09.07.2020. d) Legal Notice dated 26.05.2023 issued on behalf of the respondent no. 4. 9. It was further mentioned that the initial Government Middle School at Phelungre was upgraded to Government High School in the year 2017 and relocated to a new site. The land for this new location was donated by the Phelungre Village Council. The old School site is under use as Staff Quarter of Government High School Phelungre, in respect to which the private respondent was the donor. It was also mentioned that in the Legal Notice dated 26.05.2023 the private respondent indicated an intent to vacate the land by removing the Staff Quarters of Government High School Phelungre, if he was not appointed to the post of Chowkidar at Government High School Phelungre; therefore, it was mentioned in the affidavit that considering all the available records, the Department decided to appoint the respondent no. 4. This Court further takes note of that the affidavit filed by the private respondent wherein the private respondent has also taken similar stand, which has been taken by the State respondent. 10. In the backdrop of the above, this Court heard the learned counsels for the parties. 4. This Court further takes note of that the affidavit filed by the private respondent wherein the private respondent has also taken similar stand, which has been taken by the State respondent. 10. In the backdrop of the above, this Court heard the learned counsels for the parties. From the materials on record it is seen that the Government of Nagaland had issued a Notification dated 05.03.2018 thereby notifying a policy with regard to appointments to Grade-IV posts under the Government of Nagaland on landownership bass. This Court further finds it pertinent to take note of that a perusal of Clause 1(a) categorically stipulates that w.e.f. 26.07.2005, there would be no agreement entered into for acquiring any land free of cost with a condition for employment in service or contractual works. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of Clause 3(a) and 3(b) which stipulates that in respect to cases prior to 26.07.2025, whether the specific written agreement exists providing for employment to the landowner, the claim of landowner for employment should be settled in terms of such agreement. It is further seen that if there is any claim for providing employment as a result of oral agreement, the Department concerned shall refer the matter to the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned District who shall examine such claim carefully including whether any employment or any other facility including contract of supply order has been given in the past. The manner in which it is to be carried out is being specifically mandated in Clause 3(b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018. 11. In the instant case, it would be seen that the Sub Divisional Officer (C) HQ had prepared a Report on the matter pertaining to the appointment of Chowkidar at Phelungre Government High School. The claim of the respondent no. 4 was rejected merely on the ground that no written agreement or terms and conditions with the Government could be produced. This was done so without taking into consideration Clause 3 (b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018. This Report was the basis upon which the respondent no. 2 had issued the Notification dated 05.05.2023 to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Department of School Education and SCERT. It is further seen that thereupon, an appeal was filed by the respondent no. 4 along with various documents. This Report was the basis upon which the respondent no. 2 had issued the Notification dated 05.05.2023 to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Department of School Education and SCERT. It is further seen that thereupon, an appeal was filed by the respondent no. 4 along with various documents. The record further reveals that the Deputy Commissioner who ought to have thereupon made further verification and submitted a fresh report had not done so but only issued a Communication dated 19.06.2023, stating inter alia that the documents which were submitted by the respondent no. 4 along with the Legal Notice was self-explanatory. 12. It is also pertinent to observe that on the basis of the Letter dated 09.06.2023 the impugned Approval Letter was issued as well as the impugned Appointment Order. From the materials on record and more particularly from the affidavit filed by the State respondent it reveals that they have reviewed the materials and on the basis of which the respondent no. 4 was appointed on landownership basis. However, no materials whatsoever have been placed as to whether the respondent no. 2 on the basis of the said documents have asked the Deputy Commissioner to make a re-verification and on the basis of which the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire had submitted a report which is a mandate in terms with Clause 3 (b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018. 13. Taking into account the above, it appears that there has been some laxity on the part of the State respondents in taking due steps for the purpose of appointment of the respondent no. 4, it is the opinion of this Court the interest of justice would be met by directing the respondent no. 2 to seek a Report from the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire in terms with Clause 3(b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018; and basing upon the said report, take appropriate steps as regards the impugned Appointment Order of the respondent no. 4. 14. This Court has given an anxious consideration in respect to the challenge to the impugned Administrative Approval as well as the impugned Notification by which the respondent no. 4 was appointed and taking into account that it was on account of the fault of the respondents for not taking appropriate steps this Court has not interfered with the appointment of the respondent no. 4 but has made the appointment of the respondent no. 4 was appointed and taking into account that it was on account of the fault of the respondents for not taking appropriate steps this Court has not interfered with the appointment of the respondent no. 4 but has made the appointment of the respondent no. 4 subject to the outcome of the report to be submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire. 15. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions. (i) The respondent no. 2 is directed forthwith to take steps in not later than 10 (ten) days from the date a certified copy of the judgment is placed before him, for seeking a report from the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire in terms with Clause 3(b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018. (ii) The Deputy Commissioner, shall in the procedure mandated under Clause 3(b) of the Notification dated 05.03.2018, make a determination as to whether the respondent no. 4 is entitled to be considered on the basis of the landownership basis. This Court further directs that the report be submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire within three months from the date it is being referred by the Principal Director, Department of School Education, Nagaland: Kohima/respondent no. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire, however, shall also keep in mind that in terms with the Notification dated 05.03.2018, there can be no agreement entered into with the Department on or after 26.07.2005 for acquisition of land with a condition for employment in service or contractual works. 16. With the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.