HC: Tourists not staying in HPTDC hotels, may order their closure
Himachal Pradesh is referred as ‘Dev Bhumi’ and is also recognised as a tourist destination. However, the HP Tourism Development Corporation (HPTDC) is apparently in a shambles, said the HP High Court while dealing with a petition of a former employee of the HPTDC. The petitioner had alleged that the corporation was not paying him retirement benefits.
During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of the court that the Managing Director of the corporation had filed an affidavit in this regard. After perusing the affidavit, Justice Ajay Mohan Goel said, “It reveals shocking details. There has been delay in the payment of post-retirement benefits to all retired employees and the dues payable to the retired employees on August 31, 2024, stood at over Rs 35 crore.”
HPTDC must collaborate with pvt partners
- If the corporation is not in a position to manage and run these properties, it is not understood as to why steps are not being taken to lease or run them in partnership with some expert bodies or business entities, the High Court noted
- ‘All that this court is observing is that modalities can be worked out as the corporation can run its properties in collaboration with other players in the field so that the properties of the corporation start earning profit’ the court observed
Justice Goel observed, “It is not that tourists are not coming to the state. In fact they are coming. However, the issue is that they are not staying in HPTDC properties. It appears that they are residing in hotels other than the ones owned by the HPTDC. They are also having meals in restaurants other than those run by the HPTDC, which has properties at prime locations in the state.”
The court observed, “The HPTDC has several properties all over the state. If it is not in a position to manage and run these properties, it is not understood as to why steps are not being taken to lease these properties or run these in partnership with some expert bodies or business entities who may be keen to run the hotels owned by the corporation. This does not mean that the HPTDC per se has to severe its relationship with its properties and hand over the same on a platter to private individuals or entities. All that this court is observing is that modalities can be worked out wherein the corporation can run its properties in collaboration with other players in the field so that these start earning profit.”
It said, “Otherwise, it is high time that the court might think of actually ordering the closure of the properties of the corporation as the same rather being a boon to the state or the corporation are turning out to be the bane on the exchequer, as the HPTDC is a state-owned corporation.”
The court directed Principal Secretary (Tourism) and Managing Director of the HPTDC to file separate affidavits in terms of the observations made by the court by the next date of hearing so that something could be done to convert these white elephants (properties of the corporation) into profit-earning units.
