C.W.P. No. 19053 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 19053 of 2009 Date of decision: 10.12.2009 Dr. R.B. Jain ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. N.K. Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) This writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 11.10.2006 (Annexure P-8) vide which the claim of the petitioner was accepted for the time being by the employer, whereas vide order dated 6.2.2009 (Annexure P-10), the State Government took a positive stand that they have no concern with the matter. Operative part of Annexure P-10 reads as under: - “It is clear from the above that Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College Brahmanwas Rohtak is an unaided private college which the only competent authority to take decision in the matter of retiral benefits, salary etc. of its employees without intervention of the State Government. In view of the above, there is no merit in the legal notice so far as the Government of Haryana (Director AYUSH Haryana) is concerned, the notice is decided accordingly.” C.W.P. No. 19053 of 2009 -2- On being questioned, as to how the writ is maintainable against the Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College Brahmanwas, Rohtak, in view of the stand taken by the Haryana Government, stating therein that the College is an unaided private institution, the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the proceedings dated 25.7.2006, which were held under the chairmanship of Sh. R.S. Doon, I.A.S., Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, regarding maintenance of law and order and educational atmosphere in Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College Brahmanwas, Rohtak. In the said meeting certain decisions for maintaining law and order were taken. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the order shows that the College is working under the control and supervision of the State Government, therefore, writ would be competent. This plea deserves to be noticed to be rejected. In the meeting dated 25.7.2006, a temporary arrangement by the Deputy Commissioner was made and not permanent arrangement, to hold that the College is under the direct control of the State Government. The decision was required as there was law and order problem in the College, it was in that situation that certain temporary arrangements were made. The meeting, therefore, does not, in any way, lead to a conclusion that the College is working under the control of the State Government. The learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter referred to Annexures P-11 and P-12 to contend that there is State control over the College. Annexure P-11 is only an advertisement inviting applications C.W.P. No. 19053 of 2009 -3- from the candidates for appointment in the College, whereas in Annexure P-12 it is mentioned that salary would be fixed in view of the norms fixed by the State Government. This also cannot lead to a conclusion that the State has the deep or persuasive control over the working of the College so as to bring it under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, specially in view of the positive stand taken by the State Government in response to the representation submitted by the petitioner. The other respondents impleaded in the writ petition have no concern with the matter in dispute. For the reasons stated above, it is held that writ against Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College Brahmanwas, Rohtak, is not competent. Dismissed as not competent. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge December 10, 2009 R.S.