A High Court judgment reaffirms that when a government scheme creating temporary posts is discontinued, courts cannot direct appointments under that scheme—even where past inquiry reports or previous litigation favour the claimant. The order confirms that such claims are not maintainable once the scheme is closed, upholding established legal principle and acting as binding authority for similar disputes involving ceased schemes in the education sector.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/15936/2019 of NEERU DOGRA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC010724312019 |
| Date of Registration | 30-05-2019 |
| Decision Date | 29-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts in Punjab and Haryana |
| Type of Law | Service Law / Administrative Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether appointment on a temporary, scheme-based post can be directed after cessation of the scheme. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that since the scheme under which Education Volunteers were appointed was discontinued by the State Government as of 29.04.2011, and the nature of the post was purely temporary and dependent on the scheme, no mandamus could be issued to appoint the petitioner to such a non-existent post. The petitioner’s claim was previously rejected by a competent order, which was not challenged. The petition lacks merit as the scheme no longer exists. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The petitioner sought mandamus for appointment as Education Volunteer, relying on a favourable inquiry report. The relevant scheme was closed by the State w.e.f. 29.04.2011. The appointment letter of respondent No.4 (issued in 2009) was challenged. A prior writ, disposed in 2012, resulted in rejection of petitioner’s representation by order dated 27.08.2018, which was not challenged. Respondent No.4 had already left the post by 2019. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Punjab and Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other Indian High Courts considering similar facts (discontinued posts or schemes) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reiterates that writs of mandamus for appointment cannot be granted once the scheme or post has ceased to exist, regardless of prior favourable inquiry reports.
- Explicitly notes that non-challenge of an adverse administrative order rejecting a claim is fatal if such scheme and post have ceased.
- Lawyers should verify scheme continuity when advising on service appointment writs.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court recognized the claim was for a temporary post (Education Volunteer), created under a specific government scheme.
- It was admitted by both parties that the scheme ended on 29.04.2011, with no continuing legal basis for the post.
- The Court found that since the scheme and the post had ceased to exist, no mandamus could be issued for such an appointment.
- Prior litigation resulted in an order rejecting the petitioner’s claim, which was not further challenged, reinforcing finality.
- The principal legal maxim applied: courts cannot create posts or revive discontinued schemes through writ jurisdiction.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Relied on a favourable inquiry officer’s report dated 30.05.2017.
- Claimed entitlement to appointment as Education Volunteer based on that report.
Respondents:
- Submitted that the Education Volunteers scheme was discontinued by the State as of 29.04.2011.
- Argued that respondent No.4, whose appointment was challenged, had already left the post by 2019.
- Pointed to a previous writ petition disposed of with directions for decision on petitioner’s representation, which was rejected by an unchallenged order dated 27.08.2018.
- Asserted that no relief can be granted since the scheme and corresponding posts no longer exist.
Factual Background
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for appointment as an Education Volunteer in a government school, relying on a favourable inquiry officer’s report. The scheme under which such appointments were made was discontinued by the Punjab government with effect from 29.04.2011. The petitioner previously challenged the appointment of respondent No.4 via a writ petition, which led to an administrative rejection of her claim in 2018, a decision never further contested. Respondent No.4 vacated the post in 2019.
Statutory Analysis
- The Court addressed the statutory basis for Education Volunteer appointments, noting such appointments were made strictly under a specific government scheme.
- It clarified that the posts were not part of a permanent cadre but were purely temporary, contingent on the scheme’s existence.
- Emphasized that discontinuation of the scheme abrogated legal authority and justification for keeping or creating such posts, preventing the issuance of a writ for appointment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment affirms established law regarding appointments to scheme-based, temporary posts after discontinuance of the scheme.