VINAY KUMAR KAKKAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2016-11-179
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on November 29,2016

Vinay Kumar Kakkar Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Haryana And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Rajiv Narain Raina, J. - (1.) This order will dispose of the aforementioned two writ petitions i.e. CWP No.22687 of 2015 preferred by a single petitioner and CWP No.18977 of 2013 preferred by three others. The cause and the issue involved in both the cases is common and identical, therefore, both the petitions can be conveniently decided by a single order, as the question of law and facts are the same. The main case by consent is CWP No.22687 of 2015 argued by Mr.Amit Jhanjhi, Advocate to cover ground in both the cases. Pahel Singh - respondent No.4 in CWP No.18977 of 2013 and respondent No.5 in CWP No.22687 of 2015 against whom the actions are brought are represented by Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, while Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent No.4 i.e. Haryana State Electronics Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter 'the Corporation'), which was the parent employer of respondent No.5 before he came to respondent No.3 i.e. Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board (hereinafter 'the Board'), which is the contesting respondent and whose actions in favour of Pahel Singh - respondent No.5 are challenged in both the cases.
(2.) Suffice it to say at the outset, the petitioners have sufficient locus standi to challenge the absorption of respondent No.5 in the Board in a service which was foreign to respondent No.5 since he was taken on deputation from the Corporation. The moot issue is the character of entry of respondent No.5 into the services of the Board and his subsequent absorption, which is said to be against the rules of service thereby seriously affecting the rights of the petitioners to seniority and promotion to higher posts in the Board, which is their parent organisation.
(3.) The relevant facts necessary to the understanding of the case are that the petitioners in CWP No.18977 of 2013 have been working in the Board as Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical) while one of them as Executive Engineer (Electrical) on Current Duty Charge (CDC) at Hisar, when the petitions were filed. They have been working since the last 20 years. The petitioner in CWP No.22687 of 2015 was appointed as Junior Engineer (Electrical) on regular basis on 12.11.1981 and was a diploma holder in Electrical Engineering when he was inducted to service. He was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer (Electrical) w.e.f. 08.08.2005 on ad hoc basis and continues to work in the same capacity.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.