One Family One Job Scheme employees win relief as the Sikkim High Court orders immediate reinstatement of four terminated staff members

Gangtok, June 19 : The High Court of Sikkim has ordered the reinstatement of four employees appointed under the One Family One Job (OFOJ) Scheme after ruling that their removal from service was unlawful.
The judgment was delivered by Chief Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13 of 2025 involving Kailash Subedi and three other petitioners against the State of Sikkim and various government departments. The matter was heard and decided on June 17, 2026, and the order was uploaded on June 18, 2026.
According to the court records, Kailash Subedi was appointed as a Chowkidar on February 16, 2019. Jyoti Lepcha and Priya Pradhan joined as Office Attendants on February 16, 2019 and December 21, 2018 respectively, while Pravakar Pradhan was appointed as an Office Assistant on February 16, 2019. All four appointments were made under the One Family One Job Scheme across different state government departments.

The court observed that the welfare initiative had been introduced to provide economic support to socially and financially weaker families by ensuring that each household had at least one earning member. Although the scheme clearly states that such appointments are temporary and do not guarantee regular government employment, the court noted that termination can only be carried out under conditions specifically mentioned in the scheme.
Justice Mustaque pointed out that the petitioners were removed from service during 2023 and 2024 merely on the ground that their services were no longer required. The departments concerned did not claim that the posts had been abolished, nor was there any indication that the OFOJ Scheme itself had been withdrawn or replaced.
The judgment referred to the scheme provisions which state that an employee may be terminated if family members are neglected or if it is established that another member of the family was already in government service at the time of appointment. Since none of these conditions were cited in the impugned orders, the court held that the action taken against the petitioners was illegal.
While acknowledging that certain posts could eventually be abolished, the Chief Justice observed that eligible beneficiaries under the scheme should still be considered for placement in other departments in accordance with the scheme’s objectives.
The court further emphasized that the One Family One Job Scheme was designed not merely for individuals but for the welfare of entire families.
Consequently, the High Court set aside the termination orders and directed that the four petitioners be reinstated immediately. However, the authorities have been granted liberty to terminate their services in future if any of the conditions laid down under the scheme are found to be applicable.
With these observations, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13 of 2025 was allowed.