HC stays removal of reemployed engineers

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 20

Nearly a month after extension orders in case of a chief engineer and two superintending engineers in the Haryana PWD (B&R) were quashed, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed their removal.

Justice Mahesh Grover and Justice Raj Shekhar Attri directed that the incumbents reemployed or granted the benefit of retention in service would not be disturbed till further orders.

The Bench added its interim orders protecting reemployment of the appellants would not be construed as an impediment in the way of promoting incumbents working on regular cadre, in case promotions were due and posts available.

About a month ago, a Single Bench had ruled that reemployment could not be granted beyond the age of 58 to a public servant in the absence of outstanding merit and without recording “public interest” involved in the matter at the time of granting reemployment.

Rectifying the earlier “error”, Justice GS Sandhawalia also quashed the extension orders in case of a chief engineer and two superintending engineers. As of now, two appeals have been filed in the matter.

The order came on a petition filed by RK Verma and other petitioners challenging reemployment given by the government in the PWD (B&R) Department in alleged violation of its own rules and policies.

The petitioners had contended that reemployment could only be ordered in case public interest was involved due to existence of exceptional circumstances, and only if a competent person was not available to take over the charge of the post.

The Bench was told that an MLA from Rohtak proposed a two-year extension in service in case of a respondent retiring on April 30, 2016, on account of three major projects under execution in Rohtak city.

Justice Sandhawalia had ruled the ability of the officer and the inability of other officers in the zone of consideration to continue with the ongoing work at Rohtak was never considered.

It was apparent that consolidated instructions on reemployment were totally ignored. The prescribed procedure was never followed and the Chief Secretary’s office was kept out of the loop. The right of the state to make contractual appointments and appoint suitable officers on specialised posts was very much within its power. “But reasons have to necessarily flow, when such contractual appointments are made which otherwise are expressly barred under relevant service rules, and only in public interest, it is to be done,” Justice Sandhawalia added.

The Bench concluded the respondents would be entitled to retain financial benefits received on promotion during their reemployment as they had worked against the posts.

Pradyuman murder case: Notice to Haryana

Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court today issued a notice of motion to Haryana on a petition filed by the founders of the Ryan group of institutions seeking anticipatory bail in the Pradyuman murder case.

Justice Inderjit Singh, at the same time, refused to order stay on their arrest. The Bench made it clear that the order on the issue would be passed only after hearing the state. The case will now come up on Monday. 

The owners of the Ryan group of institutions, Augustine Pinto, his wife and managing director (MD) Grace Pinto and their son Ryan Pinto had moved the High Court seeking stay on their arrest.—TNS