Delhi High Court
Anand Behari Agrawal vs Union Of India & Ors. on 28 September, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
I- 14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: September 28, 2015
+ W.P.(C) 9303/2015
ANAND BEHARI AGRAWAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sachin Datta, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Prity Sharma,
Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ashwani Kumar Upadhyay,
Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Vide impugned order of 24th September, 2015 (Annexure P-1), The
Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) had declined the proposal
for reappointment of petitioner as Chairman, Bhakra Beas Management
Board (BBMB) [henceforth referred to as the 'BBMB'] and in place of
petitioner, Sh. S.K. Sharma, Member (Irrigation) was called upon to work
as Chairman, BBMB w.e.f. 24th September, 2015.
The challenge to the impugned order of 24 th September, 2015
(Annexure P-1) is on the ground that as per Bhakra Beas Management
Board Rules, 1974 (Annexure P-2), the Chairman of BBMB is to hold
office until the successor is appointed. The proviso to aforesaid Rule 3 of
Bhakra Beas Management Board Rules, 1974 provides that unless for the
reasons to be recorded in writing, the Chairman BBMB shall not hold the
office beyond the age of 60 years.
On 11th March, 2010, petitioner was appointed as Chairman of
third respondent i.e. Bhakra Beas Management Board for a period of
three years and vide order of 12th March, 2013 (Annexure P-5), he was
given extension of current tenure i.e. as Chairman, BBMB. Again on 16th
May, 2013, petitioner was given further extension of three month and on
12th August, 2013, further extension of one month was given to him as
Chairman, BBMB. Vide order of 16th September, 2013 (Annexure P-8)
one month's further extension was given to petitioner. On 22nd October,
2013 again further extension upto 18th March, 2014 was given to
petitioner. Vide order of 18th March, 2014 (Annexure P-10), petitioner
was given another extension w.e.f. 19th March, 2014 till appointment of
the new incumbent or until further orders, whichever even occurs the
earliest.
At the hearing, learned senior counsel for petitioner vehemently
submitted that impugned order (Annexure P-1) is contrary to the aforesaid
Rule and is therefore, liable to be set aside. During the course of hearing,
learned counsel for petitioner had placed on record Communication of
23rd September, 2015 by Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances &
Pensions Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India,
which stipulates that the total tenure of reappointment should not be
allowed to exceed six years and this Communication is in respect of
declining the proposal for reappointment of petitioner as Chairman,
BBMB. It was submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the age of
petitioner is 58½ years as of now and petitioner be allowed to continue
till he attains the age of retirement, if not, then till the new incumbent
joins.
Apex Court in Om Kumar Vs. Union of India (2001) 2 SCC 386
has reiterated that when a statute gave discretion to an administrator to
take a decision, the scope of judicial review would remain limited.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, the afore-
referred orders and the material on record, I find that as per Bhakra Beas
Management Board Rules, 1974, the appointment of Chairman, BBMB is
for a term of three years and four or five extensions have been already
granted to petitioner but till date, the new incumbent has not joined. As
per the Rules, the reappointment is for further term of three years and
after giving numerous short extensions, it has been realized by the
competent authority that petitioner cannot be given reappointment for
three years because he would be completing the age of 60 years within
1½ years. The Authorities concerned in their wisdom have decided that
the reappointment is not be more than six years and rightly so. Petitioner
has already worked for a period of five years as Chairman, BBMB. The
discretion exercised by respondent does not suffer from any irregularity
nor it is contrary to the mandate of afore-referred Rule 3 of Bhakra Beas
Management Board Rules, 1974, which clearly stipulates reappointment
for a further term of three years.
During the course of hearing, a fervent prayer was made by
petitioner's counsel that petitioner be permitted to work as Chairman,
BBMB till appointment of Sh. S.K. Sharma, as Chairman of BBMB is
approved by competent authority. Since Sh. S.K. Sharma has already
joined as Chairman, BBMB, therefore, there is no justification for staying
operation of the impugned order and to await approval by the competent
authority.
While refraining to interfere with the impugned order, this petition
is dismissed. However, to avoid such like situation in future, let
respondent- BBMB expeditiously initiate and complete the process of
appointment of regular Chairman, BBMB. In this regard, let the
compliance report be submitted within a period of twelve weeks.
Respondent- BBMB be apprised of this order forthwith.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
September 28, 2015
r
