By Melarbor L Thabah
I would like to profusely thank The Shillong Times for publishing my op-ed dated June 30, 2025 on the topic Abrogation of Ad-hoc Rules in Perpetuity. It is not known whether the top bureaucrats saw this op-ed or whether it was just mere coincidence which led them to take decisive action on the issue concerning Ad-hoc appointments which greatly affects my thought process. Nonetheless, I am ecstatic that action has been taken. However, one condition has to be met to assuage the genuine concerns of all parties and the Ad-hocs. I will also be addressing the issue of Casual, Daily Wage and Muster Roll staff here.
Ad-hoc Issue: I resolutely support the Government on termination of all Ad-hoc staff bar none, only with the condition that “All those Ad-hoc staff who fail in the competitive examinations to be conducted in this one-year span by the DSC / MPSC / Recruitment Boards have to be assured in writing that they will get an alternative job as casual basis workers depending on their years of service in that Ad-hoc post which they had occupies as either Unskilled, Semi-Skilled, Skilled, Highly Skilled Causal Basis staff for which they can work till the age of 60 years”. By undertaking this “all-important one-time exercise”, the government would have shown its “humane side” of not taking away food from their table, ensuring that families of Ad-hoc employees have a decent livelihood and not allowing them to fall into poverty especially when the Ad-hoc staff is a single parent provider and the sole breadwinner of the family. By ensuring that the failed Ad-hocs do not remain jobless but employed as casual staff, the government will remove all forms of opposition since those who oppose are upset the failed Ad-hoc staff will become jobless thus falling into poverty.
The question of unfairness and the use and discard principle after extracting benefits from the Ad-hoc staffers have become null and void since when carried out by the government, the failed Ad-hoc staff will now be employed as casual staff to work till the age of 60 years. Further, the most senior Ad-hoc employee would have served from 2008 to 2025 which is only 17 years and the lesser senior Ad-hoc staff would have served way less than 17 or 10 years for which they all got these vacant sanctioned posts through nepotism and favouritism. All the Ad-hoc employees who had served for 2 decades or more have all been absorbed as regular staff via Department of Personnel Notification Dated 21.12.2022. The question of serving 2 decades or more does not arise. The government has done right by absorbing all the people who had worked from the 1980s, 1990s extending up to 2007 which is mid 2000s. The government should not abandon its stated aims at any cost since it is doing the right thing and is on the right side of history standing for the 2-3 lakh educated unemployed youths. At the same time, it should assuage the concerns of all those who had opposed this move by employing all the failed Ad-hocs as casual staff of varying hierarchy depending on their years of service. A few suggestions from my side which I had also contributed to The Shillong Times is attached herewith.
The advertisement for the over 1500 vacant sanctioned posts currently occupied by the Ad-hocs will be a pro-youth policy and highly appreciative move by the government which will be a monumental blessing to the 2 -3 lakh educated unemployed youth who had completed their graduation and post graduate degrees in professional and non – professional courses. The highly educated unemployed youth will be able to apply and compete for these posts along with the Ad-hoc staff. This gives a ray of hope for the educated unemployed youth who have lost hope when it pertains to applying for all job advertisements. A legislative mechanism has to be employed to ensure swift advertisement of vacant sanctioned posts and to ensure a complete abrogation of Ad-hoc and its associated notifications, office memorandums and rules in perpetuity.
Ad-hoc is a very unique post when compared to casual, contractual, daily wage and muster roll because unlike the latter, the Ad-hoc is a recipient of scale pay, TA/DA, and substantial yearly increments as a permanent staff who has to pass the written and viva exams and also Ad-hoc (Regular) can also be regularised after completing 10 years of service and can get promotions as permanent staff do. This is an ethical crime and is the antithesis to hard work. It in fact rewards free lunch sans hard work, diligence and perseverance.
The Government needs to abrogate all notifications / office memorandums/rules if present, pertaining to Ad-hoc Regular, Adhoc 2F and Adhoc 3F if any; to prevent the Government Order from being successfully challenged in the High Court on the SOP of the Personnel Department. This is very important since the High Court will ask the government whether the “terms Ad-hoc and their associated rules” are still present and if present, the government has a lot of potential to lose the case. Hence the Standard Operating Procedure may not hold water when the rules and terms Ad-hoc Regular, 2F and 3F have not been removed from aforementioned documents of the government.
The facts are that the vacant sanctioned posts were pre-planned, withheld deliberately for clandestine discreet appointments of selected people and that these sanctioned posts were obtained illegally sans advertisement. Written and interview exams show the extent of illegality that has been going on for decades. Nepotism and favouritism must never ever be rewarded nor condoned. Those who still oppose the Ad-hocs who fail in the open competitive exams but are appointed as highly skilled casuals need to be asked if they are anti-youth, then on which side they are on. Also do they support illegal acquisition of vacant sanctioned posts of the 1500 plus Ad-hocs or support the 2-3 lakh educated unemployed youth who are depressed, frustrated, in agony and pain, consumed by hopelessness and those who are struggling with mental health problems which affects not only them but their entire family. Those who oppose when the failed Ad-hocs have been granted highly skilled casual jobs will be on the wrong side of history.
Casual Workers Issue: Modification of the Meghalaya Regular Casual Workers Scheme, 1996 whereby a Regular Casual Employee who had served more than 10 years without any break of service cannot fill a vacant sanctioned Group D post. Only and exclusively candidates who passed the written open competitive exams should get the vacant sanctioned Group D post.
Casual Basis, Daily Wage Basis and Muster Roll Workers Issue: There are too many classifications when it comes to non-permanent staff. Many might have not even heard of the term “Daily Wage Basis.” Causal Basis and Daily Wage Basis must be combined with the rules combined as one since both follow the same Labour Payment and Classification (Unskilled, Semi-Skilled, Skilled, Highly Skilled) Rules. Muster Roll may also be combined as Casual Basis. By condensing all the three as one, it will enable rationalization and synchronization instead of complicating the issue of having too many types of non-permanent posts.
Conclusion: It is my unyielding belief that there should be only two types of non-permanent posts that is Casual Basis and Contractual Basis; the two Cs of non-permanent posts and that Daily Wage basis must be converted / renamed as Casual Basis and if possible Muster Roll to be all renamed / converted under a single umbrella which is Casual Basis. The government should modify the Meghalaya Regular Casual Workers Scheme, 1996 into a statute for non-permanent posts from advertisement to their mode of recruitment which will subsume all Office Memos, Notifications, Rules, SOPs making them redundant after subsumption. Whether the government decides to rename / convert the Daily Wage and Muster Roll into Casual Posts, there is no doubt and no question that these non-permanent employees should have the basic fundamental rights to having 15 days casual leave, 15 days earned Leave, 6 months maternity leave for the first two children and 3 months maternity leave for the third child and employees provident fund (EPF) so that they can have something to live on post-retirement. An organization that employs 15 people or more should grant EPF to its employees.
