Raj Singh vs The State of Haryana and Others

Rajiv Narain Raina, J.—Heard. A claim founded on a bona fide mistake committed by the Government in promoting an employee contrary to rule creates no right to hold the promoted post or for him to complain that withdrawing of such undue benefit can be faulted on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice, hearing, and assigning reasons and the like. Even if the petition is to succeed on these grounds the victory of the petitioner would be pyrrhic and of no practical use. The elastic of the principles of natural justice cannot be stretched beyond breaking point.

The petitioner held the substantive post of Electrician Grade-I. By an error an order dated 17.5.2011 was passed by respondent No. 3-the Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Circle, Sonepat promoting him out of turn as Electrical Chargeman, the next higher post from the quota of several feeder categories including that of Electrician Grade-I as enumerated in the Haryana Public Health Engineering Department, Circle Cadre Mechanical Establishment (Group C) Service Rules, 2009. When the mistake came to the light and knowledge or notice of the promoting authority, the office order dated 17.5.2011 was withdrawn by the impugned order dated 2.11.2011 (P-6).

An ill gotten benefit granted contrary to statutory rules does not give rise to a valid cause of action justiciable in a Court of law. The outreach of the principles of natural justice do not extend to protection in such cases and yield absurd results. If the complaint is that no reason was assigned to withdraw the illegal promotion order, no reasons are required to be assigned or communicated since the statutory rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution are reason enough. No reasonable opportunity of hearing is required to be given when the recruitment rule for promotion to the higher post of Electrical Charge-Man speaks for itself and has been breached affecting third party rights.

If Jai Bhagwan Verma was promoted as Electrical Charge-Man from one of the lower feeder posts of Electrician Grade-II in the absence of a sanctioned post of Electrician Grade-I in Public Health Engineering Circle, Sonepat in 1979 and there were no service rules then in existence, this would not help the petitioner in protection of his unlawful order of promotion dated 17.5.2011 withdrawn by the impugned order. The respondent-State in its written statement is categoric that after the new service rules were promulgated the department has made no promotion to the post of Electrical Charge-Man from the Cadre of Electrician Grade-II.

There are no fetters on the power of the State Government to correct its mistakes at any time when brought to its notice. Estoppel cannot be pleaded as defence against rules.

No ground is made out to interfere with the impugned order dated 2.11.2011.

No merit worth admission of the matter for regular hearing. Dismissed.