It is most significant to note that the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Suresh Pal vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd and others in CWP-2316-2020 (O&M) and 37 other connected cases and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2025:PHHC:054313 that was pronounced on 04.03.2025 has minced just no words absolutely to hold in no uncertain terms that the Constitution of India holds the supreme authority, and no individual organ of State – Judiciary, legislature or executive – is superior to the other. Absolutely right! We thus see that the Bench allowed the present petition. The order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-8) is hereby set aside. Since the punishment order has been set aside, the appellant authority order would also be set aside accordingly.
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri of Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “By this common judgment, a bunch of writ petitions bearing CWP-2316-2020, CWP-16465-2021, CWP-4408-2022, CWP-8351-2022, CWP-17507-2024, CWP-13186-2022, CWP-21593-2020, CWP-9153-2015, CWP-21692-2024, CWP-914-2024, CWP-8790-2024, CWP-1308-2021, CWP-24743-2024, CWP-29214-2023, CWP-5624-2023, CWP-13410- 2021, CWP-26639-2021, CWP-13951-2023, CWP-3042-1999, CWP15530-1999, CWP-24289-2022, CWP-24290-2022, CWP-24296-2022, CWP-24293-2022, CWP-19466-2024, CWP-22398-2021, CWP-1581- 2024, CWP-19532-2024, CWP-19533-2024, CWP-19551-2024, CWP19553-2024, CWP-19556-2024, CWP-19598-2024, CWP-19634-2024, CWP-19636-2024, CWP-23186-2024, CWP-19795-2024 and CWP-20316- 2024 are being disposed of.”
As we see, the Bench then specifies in para 2 stating that, “In this bunch of 38 writ petitions, important issues in the field of administrative law emanating from service jurisprudence have been dealt with.”
Most significantly and so also most remarkably, the Bench encapsulates in para 3 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating that, “From the second half of the 20th Century, it was the judicial ingenuity which formed the basis of renaissance of the administrative law. Law and Society are never static and they are always dynamic. In England, there is no written Constitution and still the field of administrative law progressed through judge-made law. In India, there are three organs of the State i.e. the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive. None of the organs of the State is superior to the other. The sole superiority vests in the Constitution of India and hence, the Constitution of India is supreme. The basic structure of the Constitution of India and Part III of the Constitution of India incorporating Fundamental Rights are the most precious and integral part of the Indian Legal System. One of the basic and most important aspect of administrative law which developed over a period of time not only in England and America but also in India is “Principles of Natural Justice”. Initially, twin principles of natural justice, namely, Audi Alteram Partem i.e. hear the other side and Nemo Judex in Causa sua i.e. Doctrine of Bias were accepted but later on, through judicial precedents the scope was further expanded in multifarious dimensions.”
Equally significant is what is then propounded in para 4 observing that, “Infringement or breach of principles of natural justice in any form need to be corrected through Courts and at the same time, these principles are required to be inculcated and imbibed in the deciding authorities, who are judicial, quasi-judicial and purely administrative authorities in order to meet the Constitutional goals and to uphold the Rule of Law. It is in this context that various instances of breach of the principles of natural justice are under consideration in the present bunch of cases. Therefore, efforts have been made with the able assistance of the learned counsels to identify the areas of breaches, rectifying them and taking measures to eradicate the same at the first instance by the authorities. ‘Interest republicae ut sit finis litium’ which means it is in the interest of State to put an end to litigation and not to perpetuate the same. This Court has also in larger interest delved into the pre-emptory measures which can be taken by the administrative authorities through the methods of education, training, inbuilt robust legal support system and accountability. Judicial Review of administrative action is an integral part of Indian Legal System and at the same time the precious and valuable time of Courts must not be consumed only because the administrative authorities are ignorant of principles of law. Another issue pertaining to escaping from responsibility by the administrative authorities have been discussed under the heading of “let the Court decide syndrome”.”
To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 5 stating that, “It all started when this Court was apprised in one of the cases that order in appeal has not been passed by the appellate authority but it has been passed by the punishing authority. On 24.07.2024, in CWP-24293-2022 the original record pertaining to the aforesaid appeal which was dealt with by the Managing Director of the Nigam was produced before this Court and after perusing the same it was found that the appellate authority who was the Managing Director had only given a noting on the official file, “Appeal rejected. Detailed order annexed”. On a query being raised to the learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-Nigam as to where was the detailed order passed by the Managing Director by which the appeal was rejected as aforesaid, to which he stated that there was no such order passed by the Managing Director, whereas the appellate order was in fact passed by the Chief Engineer/Admn., UHBVN, Panchkula vide Annexure P-28 and not by the Managing Director of the Nigam who was in fact the appellate authority and was supposed to pass the order. Therefore, this Court on the aforesaid date noted that the aforesaid state of affairs is extremely serious in nature having serious consequences and the Managing Director of the Nigam and the Chief Engineer/Admn., UHBVN were also impleaded as party in the present petition.”
Do note, the Bench notes in para 6 that, “There are four power utilities in the State of Haryana and on 09.08.2024, all the remaining power utilities were also impleaded as party in the present petition and this Court requested the learned Advocate General, Haryana to assist this Court on these issues. This Court also on the aforesaid date took note of the fact that in large number of cases which may run into more than hundreds of cases, such kind of orders have been passed for a large number of years and rather decades, whereby the appellate authority and the punishing authority are the same and therefore, this Court deemed it fit and necessary to understand as to why it has so happened because it was also possible that the officers who have adopted and followed such practice are not being properly trained and are not aware of the legal provisions besides the principles of natural justice. It was also not very clear as to whether the subject of administrative law was being taught to the senior officers who got trained at Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, Uttarakhand and therefore, this Court impleaded Union of India as a party in the present petition so that the aforesaid position could be ascertained and corrective measures could be taken at the time of training of IAS Officers. Therefore, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General of India was requested to assist this Court on behalf of Union of India.”
Do further note, the Bench then notes in para 271 that, “After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that there is in fact no punishment order passed by the punishing authority and he only proposed that stoppage of one increment without future effect be awarded to the petitioner which is clear from the language used as reproduced above but the actual order of punishment has been passed by the Under Secretary who was not competent and a subordinate officer and he was not a punishing authority. The aforesaid reproduction of the noting given by the punishing authority is only in the nature of a proposal that the punishment is to be awarded but there is no awarding of any punishing by the punishing authority.”
Finally and far most significantly, the Bench as a corollary, then concludes in para 272 holding that, “In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-8) is hereby set aside. Since the punishment order has been set aside, the appellate authority order would also be set aside accordingly and it will be insignificant even if the appellate order has been reiterated by the appellate authority because the punishment order so attached as Annexure P-8 itself has been set aside. Although the case could have been remanded back to the punishing authority but considering the fact that Annexure P-8 has not been passed by the punishing authority and by some subordinate officer and rather there is no order passed by the punishing authority at all and therefore, no such remand can be made to the punishing authority. If any amount has been recovered from the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to him alongwith interest @ 6% per annum (simple) within a period of four months from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
G. CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS
(i) Whenever a quasi-judicial authority or a purely administrative authority is vested with a power by any law for the time being in force to decide or pass an order, the power can be exercised by the same authority in which the power vests and no other authority.
(ii) An order passed by a subordinate officer or any other officer not authorised to pass an order by stating that the same has been passed with the approval of the authority in whom power otherwise vests is illegal, perverse, arbitrary and coram non-judice.
(iii) An order passed by punishing authority on behalf of appellate authority by stating the same to have been passed with the approval of appellate authority is impermissible, illegal, nullity, coram nonjudice and violative of principles of natural justice namely, Nemo Judex in Causa Sua.
(iv) An order imposing punishment or any other order involving civil consequences as also an appellate or revisional order, if passed by a single stroke of a pen in the noting sheet or otherwise stating to be rejected or accepted or remanded etc. is illegal, arbitrary, cryptic, nonspeaking and without application of mind. Therefore, it is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
(v) When a quasi-judicial authority or an administrative authority passes any order involving civil consequences, the same has to be communicated to the concerned employee within reasonable time unless prohibited by any law for the time being in force. Communication can be made by any other subordinate officer by forwarding and attaching the actual order passed by the competent authority and not by substituting it with his own order. In case the actual order of the competent authority is not conveyed to the employee, the same shall be deemed to have been not communicated.
(vi) A draft order prepared by any authority other than the competent authority and thereafter, put up for approval and simply approved by the competent authority either by tick marking the same or otherwise is no order in the eyes of law since the order has not been passed by the competent authority but is only an approval of a draft order prepared by some other authority who was not competent to pass the order. A speaking order involving civil consequences must be passed by a competent authority in whom the power vests under the law and simply approving a draft order drafted by another officer amounts to abdication of powers causing miscarriage of justice and therefore impermissible.
(vii) In case it is simply conveyed by a lower administrative staff to an employee that his/her representation/legal notice/demand justice notice has been rejected/accepted by the competent authority but the order so passed by the competent authority is not attached or conveyed, the same is impermissible, illegal and arbitrary. Right of an employee to be informed by way of a copy of actual order involving civil consequences passed by a competent authority is hereby held to be a part of principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
(viii) If an order is passed by any authority by ‘copy-pasting’ of any earlier order(s) of some other case file/employee by only substituting the name, date etc., the same shall be an illegal, perverse, non-speaking and arbitrary order. The respondents are therefore directed to refrain from passing such ‘copy-paste’ orders which are stereotyped and mechanical in nature.
(ix) When the administrative authorities by their acts and omissions evade their own responsibilities and leave it to the Courts to decide, it leads to a “let the Court decide syndrome” which can be dismantled inter alia by taking pre-emptory measures like legal education, training and accountability. Lack of knowledge of basic principles in the field of administrative law is also a strong factor causing the aforesaid syndrome. Consequently, the Union of India is hereby directed to ensure that in the Training Institutes for Civil Servants including Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, adequate and in-depth training and education be imparted in the subject of Administrative Law by a dedicated faculty on the subject. Thereafter, regular refresher courses be also conducted from time to time. Professors, Legal Practitioners, Research Scholars or other suitable resource persons be also associated from time to time.
(x) The officers of all ranks of all public sector establishments must exercise their power in accordance with law not only in a diligent manner but in an “Extra-diligent manner” while being sensitive to the human values, compassion, humility and humanism to achieve the goals enshrined in the Constitution of India. While dealing with grievances pertaining to pensionary/retiral benefits, disability issues, medical reimbursement and alike issues, the ‘head of the establishment/department/public sector undertakings, instrumentalities of the State’ shall be considerate for expeditious redressal of grievances in accordance with law.
(xi) The Administrative Departments/Statutory Boards/ Corporations/Public Sector Undertaking etc. are directed to revamp their legal departments and establish a Robust Legal Support System incorporating legal education, training and accountability.
(xii) Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present bunch of cases, this court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondent power utilities to plant trees in the State of Haryana wherever the same are required, considering the fact that sustained presence of trees will offer immeasurable advantage to even successive generations. Out of the present bunch of 38 cases, 30 cases pertain to UHBVNL, 5 cases pertain to DHBVNL and 3 cases pertain to HVPNL. Consequently, it is directed that total of 50,000/- (Fifty thousand) trees, preferably having medicinal values, shall be planted by all the 3 power utilities who are Respondents in the present bunch of cases in the proportion of 30,000 trees by UHBVNL, 10,000 by DHBVNL and 10,000 by HVPNL. All the 3 power utilities are directed to actively coordinate with the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, State of Haryana to identify the areas where plantation of trees is mostly required, depending upon soil type, topography and variety of trees. The exercise for plantation shall be completed by the aforesaid power utilities within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and they shall supervise the growth of the said trees at their own cost and expenses for the next 3 years. In case any replacement of the trees is required, then the same shall be undertaken by them from time to time. Report regarding number of surviving trees shall be submitted to this court with the requisite certification from the aforesaid Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, State of Haryana after the aforesaid period of 6 months and thereafter again after 3 years from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The registry of this court shall list this case for compliance purposes, accordingly, in the month of January, 2026 and thereafter in January, 2029.
A Copy of the present judgment be sent to the concerned official respondents of all the cases, Chief Secretary of the State of Haryana, the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, State of Haryana.”
Sanjeev Sirohi