The Punjab and Haryana High Court has strongly criticized the growing tendency among administrative authorities to shirk their responsibilities and leave decisions to the judiciary, calling it the “Let the Court Decide Syndrome.” Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, while hearing a set of petitions challenging departmental actions against employees of Haryana's power utilities, emphasized the need for stronger legal training and accountability among civil servants.
“When administrative authorities, through their acts or omissions, evade responsibilities and pass them on to the courts, it creates a Let the Court Decide Syndrome. This can be dismantled through legal education, training, and accountability,” observed Justice Puri.
To address this issue, the Court directed the Union of India to ensure that all civil servant training institutes, including the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration in Mussoorie, must provide adequate and in-depth training in Administrative Law. The Court also instructed that regular refresher courses be organized, involving professors, legal practitioners, and researchers as faculty and resource persons.
“Law and society are never static; they are dynamic,” said Justice Puri, stressing that despite England having no written Constitution, administrative law has thrived through judge-made law. In India, “the Constitution is supreme, not any organ of the State,” he added.
The judgment further dealt with multiple violations of the principles of natural justice in the 38 cases under review—30 from UHBVNL, 5 from DHBVNL, and 3 from HVPNL. The Court noted that many orders affecting employees were either issued by unauthorized persons or approved in a mechanical, non-speaking manner without proper reasoning.
Here are the key directions issued by the Court:
- Only the competent authority vested with legal power can issue orders. Delegating this to others is illegal and void.
- Orders approved or passed on behalf of another authority without legal sanction are perverse, arbitrary, and coram non-judice.
- Punishment orders signed off by appellate authorities or referencing approval without their direct issuance are impermissible and void.
- Orders passed by simply writing “approved” or “rejected” in noting sheets are arbitrary, non-speaking, and violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
- Any order with civil consequences must be communicated in a reasonable timeframe by forwarding the actual document, not through substitution.
- Draft orders approved by competent authorities but written by unauthorized persons are not valid orders and amount to a miscarriage of justice.
“Speaking orders involving civil consequences must come from the competent authority under law. Simply approving someone else’s draft is a serious abdication of responsibility,” the Court stated.
As part of a corrective and environmental initiative, the Court also ordered a plantation of 50,000 trees by the three power utilities:
- UHBVNL: 30,000 trees
- DHBVNL: 10,000 trees
- HVPNL: 10,000 trees
These trees, preferably of medicinal value, are to be planted as a symbolic and corrective action, linking legal accountability with social responsibility.
Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate and Ms. Shefali Bahia, Advocate for the petitioner(s) 19795-2024.
Mr. R. Kartikeya, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in CWP-21593-2020.
Mr. Sunil Polist, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in CWP-1581, 19532, 19533, 19551, 19553, 19556, 19598, 19634, 19636-2024.
Ms. Anju Arora, Advocate for petitioner(s) in CWP-13951-2023.
Title: Suresh Pal v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others
