SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
J.B. MUDGAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS – Respondent



##PAGE1##

CWP-6284-2016 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP-6284-2016 (O&M)

J.B. Mudgal

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

....Respondents

Reserved on: 09.12.2025

Pronounced on: 19.12.2025

Uploaded on: 19.12.2025

Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? No

Whether full judgment is pronounced? Yes

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present: Mr. Sunil Kumar Nehra, Senior Advocate

with Mr. Viren Nehra, Advocate,

Mr. Rahil Mahajan, Advocate,

Mr. Arjun Dosanj, Advocate

Mr. Anuj Chauhan, Advocate, and

Ms. Meghna Nehra, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl.A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Harsh Jain, Advocate

for respondents No.2 to 5.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been preferred under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature of

mandamus directing the official respondents to appoint the petitioner on

the post of Director from the date the post fell vacant and from the date

other persons were appointed to this post i.e. 08.04.2015, or in the

MOHD YAKUB

2025.12.19 17:17

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of

this document

Punjab & Haryana High Court,

Chandigarh.

##PAGE2##

CWP-6284-2016 2

alternative, promote him from the date his junior Naresh Sardana was

appointed to the post of Director i.e. 19.03.2016.

2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contended that

the petitioner joined as a Chief Engineer on 02.07.2014 and is the

senior-most on that post in all three utilities i.e. HVPN, UHBVNL and

DHBVNL, after Subhash Deswal, who was placed under suspension

w.e.f. 25.07.2014. In order to fill up the post of Director in the said

utilities, the State Government issued a notification dated 10.02.2015

(Annexure P-1), which laid down the following criteria:

“The Governor of Haryana is further pleased to

order that the Technical Directors as Whole Time Directors

in the aforesaid four Haryana Power Utilities would be

appointed as per the following procedure:

i) The two posts of Technical Directors each in the

three Haryana Power Utilities HVPNL, UHBVNL &

DHBVNL will be filled up from amongst the eligible

candidates on the basis of common seniority of the

Chief Engineers in these three utilities.

ii) The two posts of Technical Directors as whole

time directors in Haryana Power Generation

Corporation Limited will be filled up on the basis of

the seniority list of eligible chief Engineers

maintained in the HPGCL.

iii) These appointments would be made on the basis

of seniority-cum-merit principle.

iv) The tenure of Technical Directors as Whole Time

Directors would be one year or the date of

superannuation of the person concerned, whichever

is later.

v) If any of the Power Utility feels the need to attract

talent from the open market in any specified field like

operations, Information Technology or any other

field, one additional post of Director, with a tenure of

two years may be created by the State Government

from time to time.

MOHD YAKUB

2025.12.19 17:17

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of

this document

Punjab & Haryana High Court,

Chandigarh.

##PAGE3##

CWP-6284-2016 3

Detailed selection criteria will also be approved by

the State Government separately as and when such a

post is decided to be created for the Power Utility

concerned.”

3. He has further submitted that in the month of April, 2015,

six posts of Technical Directors fell vacant. Vide order dated

02.03.2015, the Additional Chief Secretary clarified that a committee of

all four Managing Directors of the HPUs would evaluate 12 candidates

i.e. twice the number of vacancies. It was further stated that amongst

those found suitable, the senior most personnel would be selected. The

petitioner was also considered amongst these 12 candidates and the case

of 06 of the senior most Chief Engineers was considered again.

However, the committee only recommended four persons for the post of

Technical Directors. The case of the petitioner was not considered even

though he was one of the 12 senior most candidates and two posts

continuou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top