The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued a stern warning to the state's principal secretary of finance, Devesh Kumar, for what it termed "wilful defiance" of a Supreme Court directive. The apex court's order mandated the clearance of long-pending domestic help and telephone expense arrears owed to retired judges or their widows, which have been outstanding since September 2021.
Court Stops Short of Sentencing, For Now
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Jiya Lal Sharma expressed extreme dissatisfaction with the officer's conduct. The bench explicitly stated that it had no option but to sentence the officer for his defiance. However, it agreed to a request from Advocate General Anup Kumar Rattan to keep the punitive order in abeyance temporarily.
The court made it unequivocally clear that failure to comply by the next date of hearing would result in immediate punitive action. "Apparently, this court is being taken for a circuitous ride to avoid the payment of the arrears…," the court underlined during the hearing of a suo motu public interest litigation.
Contradictory Explanations and Delays
Devesh Kumar, who was present in court, attempted to justify the delay. He submitted that a proposal to clear the arrears was sent on December 2, examined, and concurred with in principle by December 5. He further stated the matter was placed before the council of ministers for a final decision as per rules.
The court, however, found a glaring contradiction in this submission. It noted an affidavit filed by the additional chief secretary (home) which stated that the council of ministers had already authorised the chief minister to make a decision on the departmental file. The high court has been hearing this case since 2023.
The bench also referenced the Supreme Court's order dated April 15 this year, which held that action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, could be initiated if its directives were not implemented.
Status of Proposals and Recruitment Issues
The finance secretary provided a breakdown of the proposals received. Out of 224 proposals from the high court and subordinate judiciary, 154 were approved, 29 rejected, and 39 returned for additional information. Decisions on the deferred proposals are still pending. He emphasized that the finance department's role was advisory and that it had approved an additionality of over Rs 1.08 crore under various heads.
In a related matter, the court addressed an issue concerning the mode of recruitment for posts like orderly, peon, and driver. An affidavit mentioned these were inadvertently listed as ‘daily-wage basis’. The court reiterated its November 13 observation that sovereign functions cannot be run on an ad hoc, daily wage, contract, or outsourced basis. The advocate general assured the court that corrective steps would be taken in consultation with the judiciary.
The high court's firm stance sets the stage for a decisive next hearing, where compliance will be the only acceptable outcome to avoid contempt proceedings.
