The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that former Haryana IAS officer Ashok Khemka was subjected to discriminatory treatment by the Centre, which denied him empanelment at the level of additional secretary or secretary with the Government of India, despite granting similar relaxations to other officers. The court directed that Khemka be treated as an empaneled additional secretary or secretary for future assignments.
Court's Ruling on Discrimination
Allowing Khemka's writ petition, a Division Bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Deepak Manchanda held that the Union government could not deny Khemka the benefit of relaxation without demonstrating any distinguishing factor between him and other IAS officers who had been granted the same concession. The court observed that the rules prescribe a three-year Central deputation requirement for empanelment, but the government has the power to relax this condition and has done so on several occasions for similarly placed officers.
Background of the Case
Khemka had challenged three orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in July 2023, which had rejected his claim that he should be treated as empaneled at the level of additional secretary or secretary before his retirement. He was represented by advocate Shreenath A. Khemka. The principal issue was whether empanelment could be granted despite the eligibility condition requiring an IAS officer to have served on Central deputation in the rank of Deputy Secretary or above for a minimum of three years.
Evidence of Discriminatory Treatment
The court noted that relaxations had been granted to other IAS officers, including a 1992-batch Tamil Nadu cadre officer who was empaneled as additional secretary or secretary on March 7, 2022, after Khemka's claim was rejected in 2021. The Bench observed that these facts went unrebutted by the Union of India. The court stated that once the Union exercises jurisdiction to relax the requirement, non-exercise of the same for Khemka amounts to discrimination.
Constitutional Violation
The judges further noted that no differentiating fact had been brought to the court's notice to justify treating Khemka differently. Holding that such unequal treatment violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, the court said: "Since there is no such differentiating fact which has been brought to the notice of the court between the petitioner and the other IAS officers who were empaneled by grant of exemption, same will amount to discrimination between similarly situated officers so as to violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India." The court added that the benefit of parity must be granted to Khemka to prevent prejudice.
Future Assignments
The court clarified that Khemka has already retired, and empanelment primarily serves to bring an IAS officer on deputation with the Government of India. Therefore, no such benefit can be extended to him in service now. However, for future prospects or assignments where preference is given to officers empaneled as additional secretary or secretary, Khemka will be treated on equal footing and considered as empaneled for such future assignments only.
