The central legal point established in the judgment is the recognition of a special contract under Article 310(2) of the Constitution of India governing the petitioner's appointment as Lokpal, and the obligation of the State to honor the terms of the appointment, including the payment of compensation for the unexpired period of the petitioner's tenure.

Amar Dutt, J.

1. The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the provisions of Section 25(2) of the Haryana Lokayukta Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2002 Act") and Section 2(2) of the Haryana Lokayukta (Repeal) Ordinance, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1999 Ordinance") ultra vires the Constitution of India and a further writ, order or direction to the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner in accordance with the terms of the warrant of his appointment and/or the dictum of the Supreme Court in Sri Justice S.K. Ray v. State of Orissa, (2003)4 S.C.C. 21. He also prays for costs.

2. The factual matrix upon which the legal challenge is based is narrow and undisputed.

[2.1] The petitioner started his service career as a member of the State Judicial Service, Punjab. After reorganisation, he was allocated to Haryana and he became District & Sessions Judge in the year 1983. He was elevated as permanent Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on 20th of June, 1994 and on transfer to the Allahabad High Court, he assumed charge as a Judge of the said High Court on 21.7.1994.

[2.2] The Haryana Lokpal Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1997 Act") was enacted with the object of providing for appointment and functioning of a Lokpal for enquiry and investigation into allegations and grievances against the public servants and matters connected therewith.

[2.3] While the petitioner was holding the office of the Judge, Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), he received D.O. No. OSD/CS/98/716 dated 16.12,1998 Annexure P4 seeking the petitioners consent for his appointment to the office of the Lokpal under the 1997 Act.

[2.4] The petitioner sent his response through letter dated 18.12.1998 incorporating therein "his consent for appointment to the aforesaid office but with an express rider/condition to enter into an express contract under Article 310(2) of the Constitution of India to ensure his continuous and uninterrupted tenure". According to the petitioner, the reasons for putting the aforesaid rider/condition was explained in the letter in the following terms:-

"All the same you may feel concerned to observe that of late there has been an all round deterioration in norms and values. The sad experience of former Chief Justice S.S. Sodhi with the change of Government in the sister State of Punjab is too recent to be forgotten. To avoid any such mishap, I would request you to ensure my continuous and uninterrupted tenure along with the consequent sanctions within the frame work of Article 310(2) of the Constitution of India. It may be worthwhile to note that I have yet another about two years to go in my service as a High Court Judge, and then, of-late it is very much in the air that the superannuation age of the High Court and Supreme Court Judges may be enhanced by another two years on the pattern of the Central Government employees as adopted by the Union Government; more so when the age of retirement has also been extended by 2 years even in the case of Service Chiefs."

In view whereof, he requested for the incorporation of the following conditions:-

(1) The appointment should be for a fixed period of at least 5 years from the date of assumption of the charge of the office of Lokpal.

(2) Entitlement to pay, allowances, leave of all kinds including encashment thereof, rent free furnished residential accommodation, conveyance facilities and perks as available to the Chief Justice of a High Court under the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 and the Rules framed thereunder from time to time subject, however, to the stipulations contained hereinafter. It is clarified that the amount of pay shall stand reduced by the amount of pension, excluding the amount of allowance, which the incumbent may be drawing.

(3) All perks and facilities including medical treatment and accommodation in hospitals as per