In this post we will discuss about the case which has come under scanner of the Punjab and Haryana high court in which the decision of the Khattar govt. to appoint 1983 batch retired IPS  officer of West Bengal cadre and former  chairman of Haryana public service commission RK pachnanda as the chairman of Haryana electricity regulatory commission (HERC).

Facts of the case :RK Pachnandawho is 1983 batch retired IPS officer of West Bengal cadre and former chairman of Haryana public service commission was appointed as the chairman of Haryana electricity regulatory commission by the Khattar government. According to a petition filed before the High court on Friday the Haryana government has appointed pachnanda incomplete contravention of article 319 of the constitution which prohibits reappointment of the chairman and members of the union public service commission and State public service commission on ceasing to be a chairman or member of the commission. He was administered the court of office late on the evening of February 5 by the Haryana power minister after questions were raised over the state government decision to appoint him. The matter reached before the high court in the wake of a petition filed by the advocate Ravinder Singh Dhull.

Appointment Challenged in Punjab and Haryana High Court
Appointment Challenged in Punjab and Haryana High Court

ALSO READ- APPOINTMENT CHALLENGED IN HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

Contentions of petitioner :

Seeking directions to quash the appointment of Pachnanda as HERC chairperson the petitioner

The petition quoted Dr. Ambedkar as saying at the time,“ I think that is a very salutary provision because any hope that might be held out for reappointment for continuation in the same appointment main act as a sort of temptation which may induce the person not to activate the same impartiality that he is expected to act in discharging his duties. Therefore that is a fundamental bar that has been provided in the draft article.”

ALSO READ- COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT CASE IN HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

It was also contended by the petitioner that the reasoning given by doctor BR Ambedkar is very clear that the disqualification has been added to it sure that the public service commission acts with impartiality and without any government interference as a large responsibility to select the prestigious civil services post lies with these commissions. The petitioner also contended that the government can act and influence appointments by alluring the chairman for the for the posting like it has been done in the present case.

According to the petitioner Pachnanda was appointed as chairman of and other prestigious statutory body which is responsible for fixing electricity tariff and many more functions including Quasi judicial functions. Thus by way of this in legal appointment the government has opened the gate of backdoor corruption and influence.

ALSO READ- UPSC TO SUBMIT CHART TO HIGH COURT REGARDING DGP APPOINTMENT

Legal issue : whether the appointment of RK pachnanda is in violation of article 319 of the constitution and is liable to be set aside or not?

Decision of the Punjab and Haryana High court: After hearing the petition the division Ben comprising of chief justice Ravi Shankar Jha and Justice Arun palli adjourned the matter for July 27 for further hearing.

Conclusion: the decision in the case discuss the above is yet to arrive and the matter has only been adjourned till 27 the july for the hearing.

ALSO READ- DIPRO SELECTION HIGH COURT RESTRAINS APPOINTMENT OF CANDIDATE

This post is written by Karishma Jain

For case specific advice on civil/administrative service matters, one may contact top/best expert Service Lawyers in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Zirakpur Derabassi Kharar Mullanpur Baltana.

More on 99888-17966.

This post covers topics related to supreme court judgement on selection process, supreme court judgments on recruitment, advertisement illegal appointment in violation of recruitment rules, supreme court judgement on recruitment rules, supreme court judgement on violation of recruitment rules unsuccessful candidate cannot challenge the selection process, relaxation of recruitment rules impermissible if the advertisement did not mention about it, advertisement mentions a particular qualification.