Daya Chaudhary, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing the present petition for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 10.7.2012, (Annexure P.10) passed by the Lokayukta, Haryana on a complaint filed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 on the ground that respondent No. 1 has no power to issue direction under Section 17(2) of the Haryana Lokayukta Act, 2002. The grievance of the petitioners in the present petition is that a false complaint was made by respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The petitioners have passed B.E./B.Tech. (Civil) degree from the Rajasthan Vidyapeeth from the Distance Learning Education conducted by the University. The said University has been granted status of the deemed University by the Central Government vide notification dated 12.1.1987. Subsequently, name of the Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udaipur was changed to Janardhan Rai Nagar, Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udaipur, Rajasthan by the Government of India. The petitioners are working with respondent No. 2 for the last many years and their work and conduct is also found satisfactory. Both the petitioners submitted their degrees with the respondents for the purpose of promotion to higher post. An objection was raised by respondent Nos. 3 and 4. On the basis of complaint made by respondent Nos. 3 and 4, respondent No. 1 has passed the impugned order dated 10.7.2012. A direction has been issued by respondent No. 1 to consider the case of promotion of the complainants at the earliest and report for the same be sent as required under Section 17(2) of the Act.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent No. 1 has allowed the complaint filed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4, whereas, he has no power to issue any direction and the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the Act. Learned counsel further submits that direction issued by respondent No. 1 is liable to be set aside on this ground alone. Written statement has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 which is on record. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent No. 1 is competent under Section 17(2) of the Act and as such the impugned order is not violative of any constitutional right of the petitioners as they have been declined promotion by the Government and their degrees of Engineering were not from recognised/approved University. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the CWP Nos. 1808 of 2011 and 1640 of 2008 were also filed before this Court by the complainants whereby the directions were issued to restrain promotions of the candidates who had obtained degrees from unauthorised institutions. The said writ petitions are still pending after admission. Learned counsel also submits that there is no stay against promotion of the complainants and other eligible candidates and by considering the complainants, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners.
(3.) HEARD arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the impugned orders as well as other documents on the file.;