Diploma Veterinary Association Haryana v. State Of Haryana And Others

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:09.07.2019 Diploma Veterinary Association Haryana ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present:- Mr. Sardwinder Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral) Short point involved in present writ petition is whether petitioner, who over and above discharging the duties being employee of department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Haryana, Panchkula, has been associated with work of 20th Livestock Census, Programme is entitled to remuneration, in addition to statutory duties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are two schemes, one by Central Government and other by State Government. Remuneration of Central Government entitles the petitioner Rs.6/- per house but of State Government is silent.

Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana has handed over a copy of short reply dated 28.05.2019 of Sh. Hardeep Singh, IAS, Director General, Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Haryana, Panchkula to the Court during the course of hearing conveying

{2} that aforementioned census was launched by Government of India w.e.f. 1.10.2018 and 1303 enumerators were allowed by the Government of India for the State of Haryana. State of Haryana requested Central Government for increasing the number of enumerators from 1303 to 2508 and in addition, allow 706 Supervisors and 52 Scrutiny Officers. Attention of this Court was also drawn to para 4 of reply. Reply is taken on record. It was next contended that aforementioned exercise in addition to Central Government is also for State Government. In fact, all the employees who are working with department has to canvass 4500 households in rural areas where urban enumerator 6000 households in urban area tentatively upto 31.05.2019 but the same has not been completed so far. On obtaining instructions from Sh.Mohit Sharma, ADA, office of Director General, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Haryana she denied that petitioner is discharging the duties till 3.00 p.m in office and thereafter undertaking the job of collecting census.

I am of the view that petition is bereft of any particulars. Simple affidavit would not make any difference, for, collecting of data on behalf of both Central and State Government, in other words, petitioner has not to undertake exercise twice for collection of data. No material has been placed on record in respect of the aforementioned averment and assertion. Even otherwise, writ petition on behalf of Association is not maintainable. Be that as it may, it is not comprehendible that persons would have such zeal to discharge the duties. If at all, it was so, certain documents with regard to administrative work if permissible in service rules were

{3} required to be placed on record. The grievance expressed does not fall within the judicial review. No ground for interference is made out. Counsel for the petitioner at this stage made a request that members of petitioner Association are facing lot of difficulties in collecting data as people do not provide Aadhar Card numbers and other details. The aforesaid request is wholly preposterous, absurd and fallacious, as in order to redress their day to day difficulties, High Court cannot be made a party. If at all, such representation is made, petitioner is at liberty to pursue same for redressal of its grievance but Court cannot become party to it.

Writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to Bar Association of this Court.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE July 09, 2019 savita/pankaj Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No