The Himachal Pradesh High Court has taken a strong stance against the state government for permitting six former chief parliamentary secretaries (CPSs) to continue occupying government accommodations without paying any licence fees. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi observed that these former CPSs were neither paying licence fees for the government houses nor were any deductions being made from their salaries by the Vidhan Sabha secretariat.
Background of the Case
On November 13, 2024, the high court had quashed the appointment of six chief parliamentary secretaries who were appointed by the Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu-led Congress government in January 2023. The affected MLAs include Mohan Lal Brakta (Rohru), Ashish Butail (Palampur), Ram Kumar Chaudhary (Doon), Kishori Lal (Baijnath), Sanjay Awasthi (Arki), and Sunder Singh Thakur (Kullu).
Government's Argument and Court's Response
The state government argued that the former CPSs were allowed to retain the accommodations subject to the final outcome of the special leave petition (SLP) pending before the Supreme Court. However, the bench pointed out that there was no stay on their removal from office and that only paragraph 53 of the earlier judgment, which related to their disqualification, had been stayed. "Under such circumstances, the occupants continue to utilise government accommodations far beyond their entitlement, and no steps have been taken to cancel the same," the bench observed.
The additional advocate general sought time to place on record the state government's decision of June 6, 2025, regarding the matter.
Previous Concerns Raised by the Court
On December 29 last year, the high court had expressed concern that the former chief parliamentary secretaries were occupying prime government residences located close to the high court, which could otherwise be allotted to judges commuting from long distances. The court had then directed the special secretary (general administration department) to file an affidavit detailing the occupants, the duration of their occupation after cancellation of their appointments, and whether any licence fee was charged for the continued occupation of government accommodations.
The court is now awaiting the state government's response on the matter.
