Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vivek Dureja vs The Punjab State Transmission ... on 1 April, 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.238-3
CWP No.24317 of 2013
Vivek Dureja
vs.
The Punjab State Transmission Corporation Ltd. and others
Present: Mr. Vijay Rana, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate
for the respondents.
* * * Through the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 15.10.2013 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.4 through which the petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of ` 2,04,822/-. According to the respondents, the aforesaid sum of rupees has been demanded from the petitioner strictly in terms of his appointment and agreement entered into between the parties before the petitioner was made to join the service of the respondent-The Punjab State Transmission Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). The impugned demand has been challenged by the petitioner on several counts including the allegations of arbitrariness and that the impugned order has been passed by respondent No.4 without jurisdiction.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent- Corporation has raised impugned demand on the basis of the agreement entered into between the parties which contained unconscionable terms. He further submitted that above said amount could have been demanded from the petitioner only if the petitioner had been imparted any training JYOTI SHARMA 2015.04.06 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.24317 of 2013 -2- at the hands of the respondent-Corporation but in the case in hand since no training was imparted to the petitioner, no such demand could have been made.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent states that the demand impugned by the petitioner is being raised on the ground that on each selection, respondent-Corporation spends crores of rupees and on account of this reason, the appointees like the petitioner are made to fill up a bond that in case they leave the service of the respondent- Corporation within two years of joining, they will have to reimburse the amount spent upon them by the respondent-Corporation.
In view of the aforesaid stand taken on behalf of the respondent-Corporation, I direct the respondent-Corporation to produce the relevant record including the notings leading to the drafting of the appointment letter of the petitioner as also the agreement entered into between the parties (Annexure P-2). The respondent-Corporation is further directed to file before the adjourned date, a specific affidavit whether this agreement is being entered into in pursuance to all selections being made by the respondent-Corporation.
Adjourned to 09.04.2015.
(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE March 31, 2015 Jyoti 1 JYOTI SHARMA 2015.04.06 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh