Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pawan Kumar Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 2 May, 2024
Author: G.S. Sandhawalia
Bench: G.S. Sandhawalia
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060380-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:060380-DB
(108) LPA-1049-2024 (O&M)
Decided on : 02.05.2024
Pawan Kumar Gupta ......Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others ......Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present:- Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. AG, Haryana.
Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Advocate and
Mr. Naman Jain, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 & 4.
*****
G.S. Sandhawalia, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)
CM-2551-LPA-2024
Application for condonation of delay of 263 days in filing the
appeal, is allowed, in view of the averments made in the application, duly
supported by affidavit of the appellant. Delay of 263 days in filing the appeal
is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060380-DB
LPA-1049-2024 (O&M)
Consideration in the present letters patent appeal is sought of the
order dated 06.07.2023 of the learned Single Judge passed in CWP-7805-
2022, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.
2. Challenge in the writ petition was raised to the appointment letter
dated 13.12.2019 (Annexure P-12) of respondent No.5 as Principal of the
Institute of Hotel Management, Panipat and to take appropriate action on the
representation dated 11.01.2022 (Annexure P-1) and to conduct inquiry as
such. The appellant/writ petitioner himself is a Principal of Institute of Hotel
Management Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition, Kurukshetra. He
was, thus, aggrieved against the appointment to the post of Principal of another
institute at Panipat, which had been granted to the private respondent.
3. The learned Single Judge while deciding two writ petition
including CWP-12683-2022 filed by one Rahul Raj Singh, came to the
conclusion that the present appellant had no locus standi, as his right has not
been violated and he was not a aggrieved party. Reliance was placed upon the
judgment of the Apex Court in JasbhaiMotibhai Desai VS. Roshan Kumar,
Haji Bashir Ahmed, 1976 (3) SCR 58. It was noticed that the said
respondent was having a 1st Class Degree from Lucknow University and 3
years Diploma in Hotel Management from Institute of Hotel Management,
Lucknow and 25 years of experience in the line and, therefore, at the time of
deputation the rules of National Council of Hotel Management and Catering
Technology (NCHMCT) were not applicable as rules of Haryana Technical
Education Board were being followed. The rules being adopted for the first
time by the Board of Governors in its meeting held on 13.04.2013 after the
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060380-DB
appointment on deputation. The writ petitioner being a member of Board of
Governors had never raised any objection at the time of extension, since the
writ petitioner himself was a signatory to the meetings and said respondent
No.5 had already superannuated and thereafter engaged on contractual basis
from 01.07.2022 to 30.06.2023.
4. We have perused the paper-book as such and noticed the initial
noting portion (Annexure R-4) whereby for the first time the file had been put
up in November, 2012 regarding the issue of deputation of the said respondent
and noticed that he was having prescribed qualification. In such
circumstances, he was recommended for a period of one year or till the regular
Principal for IHM, Panipat is appointed. It is not disputed that the said
deputation was dragged on for several years and no effort was made to appoint
a regular Principal. The said respondent on 04.12.2012 (Annexure P-3) had
initially been given the charge in his own pay scale being the Senior Instructor
for a period of one year or till the regular Principal is appointed and he was not
to claim any financial benefit on that account. Apparently, thereafter the
condition was modified and he was given the higher pay-scale also, which
would be clear from letter dated 13.11.2018 (Annexure P-3). Suddenly from
the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800+5400 GP, in which he was working, he was
given the pay scale of Rs.37400-67000+8700 GP, which would be clear from
(Annexure P-3). It is, thus, apparent that said respondent was a blue eyed boy
of the State and has earned various benefits including post retirement
assignment.
5. However, in view the fact that it was a service rivalry between the
two, hence, at this stage, we do not feel it a fit case to interfere in the well
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060380-DB
reasoned order of the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has
rightly observed that the writ petitioner has no locus standi, since he was not
an aspirant for the post in question himself being a Principal. Resultantly, in
view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the present letters patent
appeal and the same is hereby dismissed in limine.
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(LAPITA BANERJI)
02.05.2024 JUDGE
Naveen
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether Reportable : No
4 of 4
