Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 925 (PNJ)

Sangeeta Rani v. State of Haryana

2016-03-16

RITU BAHRI

body2016
JUDGMENT : RITU BAHRI, J. 1. Petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 29.07.2002 (Annexure P-6) by which she has been ordered to be retrenched after serving 16 years with respondent No. 2-Haryana Rajya Sainik Board-cum-Defence and Security Relief Fund and Managing Committee, Sainik Privar Bhawan (for brevity the Board) on regular basis. 2. Petitioner was appointed as Warden on 02.06.1986, vide appointment letter dated 02.06.1986 (Annexure P-1) and her services were regularised w.e.f. 30.09.1988. Perusal of order dated 29.07.2002 (Annexure P-6) shows that the decision was taken due to discontinuation of the hostel facilities for girls at ITC, Sainik Parivar Bhavan, Rewari from the session 2002-2003. There was no need to employ the petitioner as she has become surplus in the establishment. She has been given one month's salary in lieu of the notice and amount of retrenchment compensation. The following three instructors who have been adjusted on stop gap arrangement as Hostel Superintendents, vide letter dated 14.09.1999 (Annexure P-3): - "(i) Sham Dhar Instructor Handloom. (ii) Smt. Santosh Verma, Instructor Hosiery. (iii) Suman Lata Yadav Instructor Steno Hindi." 3. One Harish Chander, who was appointed as Instructor Shorthand English on 07.07.1995 was also adjusted as Hostel Superintendent for stop gap arrangement as per the pay bill (Annexure P-4). Kubir Singh Mann (respondent No. 3), after attaining the age of superannuation, had been appointed as Hostel Superintendent on daily wages w.e.f. 01.05.2002 to 28.05.2002 as per pay bill (Annexure P-5). The petitioner has been ordered to be retrenched on 29.07.2002, vide order (Annexure P-6). The said order retrenching the petitioner w.e.f. 29.07.2002 cannot be justified only on account of closer of the hostel facilities for girls at ITC, Sainik Parivar Bhavan, Rewari. The department has been unfair as per Annexures P-3 and P-4, by which a number of employees, who have been adjusted on ad-hoc basis as Hostel Superintendents, whereas they were working as Instructor Handloom, Instructor Hosiery, Instructor Steno Hindi and Instructor Shorthand English. Respondent No. 3, after his retirement, has been appointed on contract basis as hostel superintendent. 4. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, in which, it has been stated that Santosh Verma and Suman Lata had been adjusted in the female hostel as superintendents whereas Shyam Dhar and Jaspal Singh have been adjusted as Superintendents in the hostel meant for boys. 4. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, in which, it has been stated that Santosh Verma and Suman Lata had been adjusted in the female hostel as superintendents whereas Shyam Dhar and Jaspal Singh have been adjusted as Superintendents in the hostel meant for boys. It has been further stated that Santosh Verma and Suman Lata were seniors to the petitioner. Further it has not been denied that Smt. Santosh Verma and Suman Lata were Instructor Hosiery and Instructor Steno Hindi. Hence, even if both these were seniors to the petitioner they were not working as hostel superintendents as stop gap arrangements. As per Annexure P-3, they have been adjusted as hostel superintendents. With regard to appointment of Kulbir Singh Mann (respondent No. 3), who has been appointed on contract basis after his retirement up to 31.07.2002. It is further explained that he has been appointed exclusively in the boy's hostel. The other objection taken by the respondent No. 2 is that the Secretary, Haryana Defence and Security Relief Fund is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. This objection in the replication, the petitioner has given details by stating that this Board has been constituted by the State of Haryana and under the control of Chief Secretary of the Government of Haryana and the Sainik Parivar Bhawan has been 100% financed by the Government of Haryana as well as the Central Government. The Chief Minister, Haryana is the President by designation and Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana, Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Finance Department. Govt. of Haryana and Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Home Department are the Government nominees. In view of the said constitution of the Board, it comes within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. 5. The petitioner has also placed on record the Sainik Parivar Bhavans, Haryana, Service (Common Cadre) Rules, 1999 (Annexure P-7). In Appendix 'A of the said Rules shows that there are 9 sanctioned post of hostel superintendents and the eligibility qualifications is same for boys and girls as hostel superintendent. In the rules there is a separate cadre for the hostel superintendents and the adjustment of the hostel superintendents can be made by the Board of surplus employees in any one of the hostel. In the rules there is a separate cadre for the hostel superintendents and the adjustment of the hostel superintendents can be made by the Board of surplus employees in any one of the hostel. With closer of one hostel, 8 posts still remained vacant and after adjusting Santosh Verma and Suman Lata as Hostel Superintendents, the permission was given to them to acquire the necessary qualification for the post of Instructors. The appointment was temporary in nature to enable them to get the requisite qualification of instructors. After adjusting the said two Instructors vide (Annexure P-3) and even by appointing Kulbir Singh Mann after his retirement on daily wages rates up to 31.07.2002, the respondents cannot be take a stand there was no vacant post available to adjust the petitioner, who have served the Board from 1986 to 2000. An attempt has been made by the department to adjust the Instructors Santosh Verma and Suman Lata. The temporarily appointing them as hostel superintendents vide (Annexure P-3) to enable them to get requisite qualification for the instructors. The respondent's Board instead of retaining the petitioner, who have 16 years experience, have gone with some other employees on the post of hostel superintendents on a temporarily basis. The stand taken by the Board that Santosh Verma and Suman Lata were seniors to the petitioner is liable to be rejected as both were never appointed as hostel superintendents. They were in the cadre of instructors, which is a separate cadre. Thus, the writ petition is allowed with costs of Rs. 25,000/- and the impugned order dated 29.07.2002 (Annexure P-6) is hereby set aside. The respondents-Board are directed to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.