- (1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 15.11.2007 (P-1) appointing Dr. V.S. Pahil- respondent No. 3 as Director, Haryana State Seed Certification Agency- respondent No. 2. The main ground of challenge by the petitioners is that Dr. V.S. Pahil-respondent No. 3 is ineligible for appointment on the aforementioned post as per the provisions of the Haryana State Seed Certification Agency Service Rules, 1979 (for brevity, 'the 1979 Rules'), inasmuch as, he does not possess the educational qualification and is also overage.
(2.) Brief facts of the case necessary for disposal of the controversy raised in the instant petition are that Dr. Surinder Singh Dahiya-petitioner No. 1 is working as Deputy Director of Agriculture, Haryana at Karnal. He has done M.Sc. Agronomy and Ph.D Agriculture in Agronomy from Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar. Shri B.S. Duggal-petitioner No. 2 is having the qualification of M.Sc. Agriculture in Agronomy. He is stated to have more than 20 years experience as on 20.6.2005 in research, farm management, crop production, seed production, development and extension activities with approximately 12 years and 7 months experience in senior capacity as Deputy Director of Agriculture, Joint Director of Agriculture and Additional Director of Agriculture and even Director of respondent No. 2 Agency.
(3.) Petitioner No. 2 was selected and appointed as Director of respondent No. 2 Agency on deputation basis in pursuance to the decision taken by the governing body of respondent No. 2 in its meeting held on 17.12.2002. The said selection and appointment was, however challenged in this Court by one Bali Singh Verma by filing C.W.P. No. 19988 of 2002 (Bali Singh Verma v. Haryana State Seed Certification Agency, 2004 4 SCT 645. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.8.2004. Thus, petitioner No. 2 worked as Director of respondent No. 2 Agency from 19.12.2002 to 8.6.2005. It has been asserted that after change of Government in the year 2005, respondent No. 1 issued instructions dated 9.3.2005 directing that all those officers/officials who were on deputation from out side the State or within the State from one department to another department be repatriated to their parent organisation (P-5). Subsequently instructions dated 16.3.2005 were issued to the effect that those deputationists who have not completed their tenure in the borrowing department/organisation may be considered for retention by such organisation on merit of each individual case (P-6). However, petitioner No. 2 was repatriated and joined his parent department on 9.6.2005.;