← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/1114/2024dismissed

Satinder Pal Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

2024-01-19Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma2 pages

CWP-1114-2024 2024:PHHC:006888

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-1114-2024 Date of Decision: 19.01.2024 Satinder Pal Singh . . . . Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab and others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ****

Present:

Mr. Lovish Dhiman, for the petitioner.

**** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

1. The petitioner by way of this petition has come out with a unique prayer to quash the orders by which the State Government authorities have assigned additional duties to him. The petitioner submits that he is overburdened and would not be able to perform the additional duties. There is no allegation of malafide against any individual person of causing any harassment to him, but it appears that it is a case where on account of paucity of staff, the State authorities have directed him to perform additional duties which he is required to perform as a Government servant in terms of the Conduct Rules.

2. The petitioner appears to be shying away from his duties. However, this Court notices that the orders were passed in July, 2022, December 2022 and August, 2023 relating to assigning of additional duties which he has been performing even after filing of the present petition. This Court also notices that the petitioner has submitted representations to the authorities.

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.01.22 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-1114-2024 2024:PHHC:006888

3. While exercising powers under Judicial Review, this Court refrains from delving into the administrative realm of the executive. The orders in question seem to be purely administrative, causing no hindrance or deprivation of the petitioner's rights. Indeed, the State Government can assign additional duties or higher postings under circumstances to address the requirement of paucity of staff.

4. The writ petition filed by the petitioner is thus found to be wholly frivolous and without any basis. In fact, if the petitioner does not perform the duties, he would invite disciplinary action in terms of the Conduct Rules.

5. In view of above, no interference is warranted.

6. Writ Petition stands dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE January 19, 2024 Mohit goyal

1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No

2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No MOHIT GOYAL 2024.01.22 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document