High Court · 2025

first order, respondent no. 5 was re- appoint ed as Execut ive Officer, Nagar Panchayat , Piran Kaliyar ( Haridwar) on deput at ion; while, by t he subsequent order, pet it ioner was revert ed back t o t he post of Chief Assist ant . These orders have been put t o challenge by t he pet it ioner.

6. Pet it ioner cont ends t hat respondent no. 5 is an em ployee of Panchayat i Raj Vibhag and his subst ant ive post is Village Panchyat Developm ent Officer, which carries lesser pay scale; while, pet it ioner is m em ber of Palika Cent ralised Service serving on a post carrying higher grade pay; t he proposal for ext ending period of deput at ion of respondent no. 5 was rej ect ed by t he St at e Governm ent and he was direct ed t o be im m ediat ely repat riat ed t o parent depart m ent , t hereaft er, w it hout follow ing process, 3 respondent no. 5 could not have been brought back on deput at ion as Execut ive Officer at Piran Kaliyar, in place of t he pet it ioner. I t is furt her cont ended on behalf of t he pet it ioner t hat t he im pugned orders dat ed 4.3.2025 w ere passed due t o polit ical int erference, as respondent no. 5 is close t o polit ical m ast ers.

7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5 defends t he orders im pugned in t his writ pet it ion by cont ending t hat her client was appoint ed by deput at ion in Urban Developm ent Depart m ent , vide order dat ed 20.7.2021; and he was post ed as I n- charge Execut ive Officer in Nagar Palika Parishad, Harbart pur, Dehradun for t wo years and t hereaft er he was post ed as I n- charge Execut ive Officer, Nagar Panchayat , Piran Kaliyar. She furt her cont ends t hat init ially respondent no. 5 was appoint ed by deput at ion for t wo years, which was ext ended for anot her year, and t hereaft er, vide order dat ed 25.3.2025, his period of deput at ion was ext ended for furt her period of t wo years. I t is furt her cont ended t hat t here are about 100 4 em ployees senior t o t he pet it ioner in Palika Cent ralised Service, t herefore, he does not have any right t o hold charge of t he post of Execut ive Officer; as m inist erial em ployee, pet it ioner can be prom ot ed only up t o t he posit ion of Senior Adm inist rat ive Officer and he can never be prom ot ed as Execut ive Officer.

8. Alt hough, St at e Governm ent is com pet ent t o t ake decision as t o w ho is t o be t aken on deput at ion, however, t he m anner in which respondent no. 5 was brought back as Execut ive Officer, Nagar Panchayat , Piran Kaliyar by re- appoint ing him on deput at ion, indicat es t hat t here is som et hing m ore t o it t hat m eet s t he eye. Record reveals t hat St at e Governm ent t urned down t he proposal for ext ension of deput at ion of respondent no. 5, vide order dat ed 28.10.2024 and by anot her order of t he sam e dat e, pet it ioner was post ed as I n- charge Execut ive Officer at Piran Kaliyar. Thus, t here was a conscious decision at t he highest level t o repat riat e respondent no. 5 and t o appoint pet it ioner as I n- charge Execut ive Officer, in his 5 place. There has been no percept ible change in circum st ances, which m ay warrant reversal of t he arrangem ent , earlier m ade t he St at e Governm ent . By t he im pugned orders, respondent no. 5 has not only been appoint ed on deput at ion, but , he has been brought back as Execut ive Officer, Piran Kaliyar. The allegat ion m ade by pet it ioner t hat neit her applicat ions were invit ed nor any process was adopt ed w hile re- appoint ing respondent no. 5 as Execut ive Officer on deput at ion rem ains un- rebut t ed; why respondent no. 5 alone was hand- picked for appoint m ent by deput at ion is not explained by t he official respondent s. The count er affidavit is silent as t o w het her consent of Panchayat i Raj Vibhag, parent depart m ent of respondent no. 5 was t aken while re- appoint ing respondent no. 5 on deput at ion.

9. This Court , t hus finds subst ance in t he cont ent ion raised on behalf of t he pet it ioner t hat orders dat ed 4.3.2025 w ere passed for ext raneous reasons in disregard of public int erest or adm inist rat ive exigency. 6

10. Our St at e is governed by rule of law, which post ulat es equalit y before law and equal prot ect ion of law. I n t he present case special t reat m ent was given t o respondent no. 5, due t o which, he m anaged not only t o be re- appoint ed on deput at ion, but he also m anaged t o get post ing as Execut ive Officer, Nagar Panchayat , Piran Kaliyar. The grievance raised by t he pet it ioner t hus cannot be casually brushed aside.

11. The writ pet it ion is accordingly allowed; t he im pugned orders ( cont ained in Annexure Nos. 8, 9 & 10 of t he writ pet it ion) are quashed. This order, however, will not preclude t he com pet ent aut horit y from appoint ing respondent no. 5 on deput at ion aft er follow ing due process or post ing a regular Execut ive Officer in Nagar Panchayat , Piran Kaliyar or from t ransferring t he pet it ioner t o a post com m ensurat e w it h his st at us in som e ot her Urban Local Body. ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.) Dt : 14.11.2025 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131b b4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D65 3D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA 7