VINAY DHULL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 20.02.2017 (P-6) by which the terms and conditions of the appointment letter dated 09.12.2013 (P-4) were altered.

(2.) Pursuant to advertisement by the Haryana Public Service Commission, one post of Sub Divisional for Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board (for short 'HSAMB') was advertised and the petitioner was offered appointment letter on 09.06.2010. On 11.06.2010, the petitioner joined as Sub Divisional Officer. Thereafter, on 20.11.2012, Government of Haryana invited applications to fill 04 posts of Sub Divisional Officers (Civil) by way of transfer. The application of the petitioner was forwarded by the Chief Administrator HSAMB on 07.12012 and the petitioner was offered appointment letter dated 09.12013 (P-4) and in this appointment letter, it was specifically mentioned that his pay will be protected on his appointment as Assistant Engineer (Civil) in Haryana Irrigation and Water Resource Department and the petitioner was getting the benefit of pay protection since 19.12013. On 20.02017, the impugned order was passed against the petitioner withdrawing the benefit of pay protection by altering the condition in the appointment letter dated 09.12013.

(3.) Learned senior counsel contends that once the petitioner has been offered appointment letter dated 09.12.2013 in which there was a condition that his past service will not be counted for the purpose of seniority but he will be given the benefit of pay protection, thereafter, the terms and conditions of the appointment letter cannot be changed. The petitioner had joined the department by accepting the said terms and conditions.