Authority: High Court of Meghalaya at Shillong

Order Date: 28 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Twenty‑one petitioners (individual casual labourers) versus North Eastern Hill University (NEHU) and its officials (Vice‑Chancellor, Registrar, Assistant Registrars, Deputy Registrar, Section Officer).
  • Nature of Proceeding: Writ petition challenging an impugned letter dated 20 April 2011 that reduced payable service days from 90 to 89, thereby denying the additional 1/6th‑day wage for March 2011.
  • Background: Petitioners were engaged on a pro‑rata casual‑labour basis, paid daily wages. They alleged an arbitrary deduction of one day's wages and sought the statutory additional 1/6th‑day payment.
  • Petitioners' Allegations: Cited Supreme Court precedents (Harvana State Electronic Development Corp. Ltd. vs. Mamni and Duli Chand & Ors. vs. Union of India), argued that a later order dated 15 June 2011 allowing the 1/6th‑day payment conflicted with an Office Memorandum dated 07 June 1988 which provided a paid weekly off after six continuous days.
  • Respondent's Position: Asserted that wages had been paid per the engagement order; the 20 April 2011 letter was superseded by the 15 June 2011 order which permitted the additional 1/6th‑day wage for casual workers on a five‑day week. Highlighted contradictions in attendance registers submitted by petitioners, noting signatures on all seven days for some petitioners and missing signatures for others.
  • Court Observations: The impugned letter was over 13 years old; the substantive 15 June 2011 order had not been challenged at the time of its issuance and was only raised via a rejoinder affidavit, indicating severe laches. The attendance registers presented evidentiary contradictions, making factual determination unsuitable for a writ proceeding. The petition was filed after an inordinate delay, rendering it untenable.

Final Outcome

  • The writ petition is dismissed on the grounds of delay, laches, and the absence of a proper challenge to the 15 June 2011 order. No relief is granted to the petitioners.

Topics: Wage Dispute, Labour Law