SHRI HEISHNAM GHANANJOY vs NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY on 22 September 2026

ORDER

PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This CP has been filed against the non-compliance of the order passed by this Tribunal dated 30.05.2025. This Tribunal had directed as under: “23. As the respondent authorities have averred their intention that they are not discontinuing the services of the applicants even after the original engagement till October 2020 and the applicants will be engaged as per their suitability and requirement and qualification under different project. The applicants have already contributed and worked in the organisation for around 10 years and have developed their expertise accordingly. This may be utilised by the organisation now onwards also. Accordingly the respondent authorities are hereby directed to asses objectively the need and the vacancies against the position for which applicants were engaged, in their various projects under NIELIT and utilise their services accordingly. However, the applicants will not have any right for their regularisation within the organisation. The respondent authorities are further directed to release the salary from November 2020 onwards on the same terms and conditions as per their original engagement including increment after completion of one year service.

24. Accordingly the impugned Orders dated 25.10.2023 &12.01.2024 are quashed and set aside and these OAs are disposed of with no order as to costs. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of.”

2. It is admitted position that the applicants were appointed on purely contract and temporary basis for a specific period which has been completed and when their services were going to be terminated, they approached this Tribunal for regularisation and absorption and this Tribunal vide order dated 30.05.2025 passed an order, but denied their plea regarding absorption and give direction to the respondents to reengage them anywhere in the country in similarly situated project since they have an expertise of 10 years.

3. In compliance to the order of this Tribunal, respondents have filed compliance report and in the compliance report, they have stated that a Committee was formed and in the Committee Report dated 18.05.2026 the Agenda was to consider the case of the applicants as per para 23 (i) of the order dated 30.05.2025 “To undertake an objective assessment regarding the requirement and availability of suitable project-based positions”. From the para 2.3 of the

Committee Report, it can be seen that the applicants were offered contractual positions at various NIELIT Centres outside Manipur with protection of their remunerations. The offers included: (i.) Shri H Ghananjoy Singh - Senior Resource Person (Tech), NIELIT Tirupati (ii.) Shri Laanthoi Maisnam - Senior Resource Person (Tech), NIELIT Hyderabad (iii.) Smt Laishram Robina Devi — Resource Person (Admin), NIELIT Daman (iv.) Shri Langonjam Martin Singh — Resource Person (Admin), NIELIT Bhubaneswar However, the applicants refused to accept the same and refused to join.

4. In the second part of para 23 of the order dated 30.05.2025, this Tribunal had directed the respondent authorities to release the salary from November 2020 onwards on the same terms and conditions as per their original engagement including increment after completion of one year service. In terms of the direction, vide order dated 04.06.2026, admissible arrears was paid from November 2020 to January 2024 and vide order dated

26.05.2026, annual increment was also given from 2020 to 2023.

5. Ms. Pushpa G, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently objected the submissions of the respondents and submits that respondents were directed to release the salary from November 2020 onwards on the same terms and conditions as per their original engagement including increments after completion of 1 year service. However, the respondents released the monthly salary with respect to the petitioners w.e.f. November 2020 to 31/01/2024 only which in violation of the direction passed by this Tribunal. The respondents calculated the annual salary increment based on the very first salary received by the petitioners at the time of joining into services. That the petitioners are entitled to receive 10% of their last pay not that of 10% of A as shown in the Office Order dated 26/05/2026. The calculation for providing annual salary increment should be based on 10% of B and not on 10% of A. The respondents have not complied with the order and direction dated 30/05/2025 and the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent No. 4 ought to be rejected outrightly in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order passed in Jalim Singh Versus Nand Kishore and Others decided on 17/03/2026. Further, the Committee Report dated 18/05/2026 is glaringly different from the submission/stand taken before this Tribunal and the report has been concocted and manipulated and accordingly the same is not acceptable.

6. The respondents vide order dated 04.06.2026 paid the admissible arrears from November 2020 to January 2024 and vide order dated 26.05.2026, annual increment was also given to the petitioners from 2020 to 2023. The same was disputed by the applicants as they have calculated the increment of the salary which was paid initially when they were appointed in 2015. They avers that they are entitled for salary after January 2024. We do not find any force in this arguments of the applicants, as respondents were not bound by the appointment order. As per the respondents vide order dated 12.01.2024, they have issued order wherein they have stated that their service was utilised until the completion of project i.e till 31.01.2024 and thereafter they have not worked so they are not entitled for any salary or increment thereafter.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

8. This Tribunal vide order dated 30.05.2025 quashed the impugned order and in terms of the directions, the respondents formed a Committee and the Committee submitted Report on 18.05.2026 wherein the applicants were offered contractual positions at various NIELIT Centres in Tirupati, Daman, Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar with protection of their remunerations but the applicants failed to join. Also in terms of the direction, admissible arrears and annual increment was also given from 2020 to 2023.

9. We do to find any violation of the order dated 30.05.2025. Accordingly, CP is closed. Notice issued if any are discharged. M.A also stands disposed of. No costs.

(MALLIKA ARYA) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)

MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

SS