Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kasturi Lal Khanna vs The State Of Haryana & Ors on 20 August, 2014
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
CWP No. 18720 of 1995 #1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Date of Decision:-20.08.2014
CWP No. 18720 of 1995
Kasturi Lal Khanna
......Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Haryana & Ors.
......Respondents.
AND
CWP No. 19322 of 2003
Shri Kasturi Lal Khanna
......Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Haryana & Ors.
......Respondents.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:- None for the Petitioners in both the writ petitions.
Mr. S.S. Goripuria, DAG Haryana.
Mr. Nipun Mittal, Advocate for respondent no.2/HSMITC.
***
JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL)
By this common order, the aforesaid two writ petitions filed by petitioner-Kasturi Lal Khanna shall be disposed of as the issues involved therein are inter linked, besides, that vide order dated 3.5.2005 passed in CWP No.19322 of 2003, while Admitting the writ petition for regular hearing, the Court had directed the same to be heard with CWP No.18720 of VINAY MAHAJAN 2014.08.20 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh CWP No. 18720 of 1995 #2# 1995.
Petitioner-Kasturi Lal Khanna was promoted as an Assistant Statistician(Grade-II) post by the respondent HSMITC w.e.f. 27.06.1979. Since the post of the Company Secretary had fallen vacant on retirement of the previous incumbent, the petitioner vide order dated 30.4.1991 (P-1) was order to look after the work of the Company Secretary Grade-I post as a Stop Gap Arrangement in addition to his duties as Assistant Statistician. It is stated that in the service bylaws of the respondents, w.e.f. 17.3.1992 the third mode of recruitment i.e. by promotion was inserted for the post of Secretary. The proposal initiated in February 1993 to fill up the posts of Secretary by way of direct recruitment was abandoned by the Board of Directors in its 111th meeting held on 6.5.1993 and the petitioner was permitted to continue. The Board of Directors of the respondent in its 120th meeting took a decision on 26.06.1995 to appoint the petitioner as a whole time Secretary in the scale of 3000-4500 being eligible and suitable by adopting the mode of promotion. However, in view of the decision of the government banning all promotions/appointments in the various corporations, the said decision could not be implemented. Eventually, the government vide order dated 5.12.1995 (Annexure P-10) annulled the decisions taken on 26.06.1995 by the Board of Directors in its 120th meeting being contrary to the Directors of the Government. Subsequently, the respondent corporation passed an order dated 18.12.1995 (P-11) withdrawing even the Current Duty Charge of the post of Company Secretary from the petitioner.
Hence petitioner filed CWP No.18720 of 1995 seeking the quashing of the government memo dated 5.12.1995 (P-10) and order dated 18.12.1995 (P-11) with a further direction to the respondents to issue a formal order of his appointment as Secretary of the Corporation in view of the decision of the Board of Directors taken in their 120th meeting held on 26.06.1995.
The petitioner has filed another CWP No.19322 of 2003 seeking the grant of pay and allowances of the post of Secretary held in Current Duty Charge.
The State Government has filed a written statement in CWP No.18720 of 1995 stating that a decision had been taken by the government VINAY MAHAJAN 2014.08.20 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh CWP No. 18720 of 1995 #3# to integrate the functions and working of HSMITC and CADA with the Haryana Irrigation Department and, therefore, the government had rejected the proposal of the appointment of the petitioner as Secretary in view of the eminent merger of the corporation and its staff into the government department. It is further stated that the financial position of the respondent corporation was extremely poor which had suffered accumulated losses of almost 34 crores upto the year 1989-90 and, therefore, a ban had been imposed by the government on any promotions by exercising the powers under Article 135 of the Articles and Memorandum of Association of the Corporation. It is also stated that due to the weak financial position 1500 employees had already been declared surplus.
The State Government in its reply in CWP No.19322 of 2003 has taken the preliminary objection that the claim for grant of pay and allowances of the Current Duty Charge suffered from inordinate delay and laches, as admittedly the petition had been filed after almost 08 years of withdrawal of the said Current Duty Charge. That apart it was stated that the petitioner had been extended only additional charge of the higher post in addition to his duties of the substantive post and, therefore, he was not entitled to the emoluments of the higher post in view of the provisions of Rule 4.23 read with Clause iv of Rule 4.22 of the Haryana Civil Service Rules Vol-1 Part -1. Besides, that it was stated that the service of the petitioner along with other employees of the corporation have since been terminated/retrenched w.e.f. 30.06.2002 after observing all legal formalities.
At the time of hearing learned Counsel for the respondent/HSMITC contends that apart from the petitioner having failed to make out any case on merits in both the writ petitions, states at the bar that the respondent-Corporation stands wound up/closed w.e.f. 30.07.2002 and all its employees(including the petitioners) stands retrenched after observing all legal formalities. This Court has already dismissed writ petitions challenging the closure and the subsequent retrenchment of its employees. He further states that the State Government has formulated a policy vide notification dated 21.06.2006 for re-employment/adjustment of the retrenched employees of the various corporations/undertakings including the answering respondent and the petitioners would be adjusted, if not already in various government departments/undertakings in terms of the VINAY MAHAJAN 2014.08.20 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh CWP No. 18720 of 1995 #4# said policy. He, therefore, states that the present writ petitions have thus become infructuous.
None has come present on behalf of the petitioner to rebut the aforesaid factual position.
In view of the statement made by the learned Counsel for the respondent-Corporation at the Bar both the aforementioned writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous.
( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE August 20, 2014 Vinay VINAY MAHAJAN 2014.08.20 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh