POSTING WITHOUT STATUTORY NOTIFICATION(S) MANDATED UNDER SECTION 45(1) OF HMC ACT, 1994, HIGH COURT ADVOCATE FLAGS ALLEGED CONTINUING BREACH OF MANDATORY REQUIREMENT; SAYS ROUTINE POSTING ORDERS CANNOT SUBSTITUTE STATUTORY NOTIFICATION
Face2News/Chandigarh
A significant legal controversy continue to surface over the appointment (posting) of Municipal Commissioners in Haryana, with an Advocate practicing at Punjab & Haryana High Court, Hemant Kumar alleging that the State Government has failed to publish the mandatory notifications in the Official Gazette as mandated under Section 45(1) of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act (HMCA), 1994.
In a detailed legal cum pre-litigation representation addressed to the State Governor, Chief Minister, Urban Local Bodies (ULB) Minister, Advocate General (AG), State Legal Remembrancer (LR) and other senior officers of ULB Department, Hemant has raised questions over the legal validity of the appointment process concerning all 11 Municipal Corporations in the State.
The representation points out that Municipal Corporations in Ambala, Faridabad, Gurugram, Hisar, Karnal, Manesar, Panipat, Rohtak, Sonipat, Yamunanagar and Panchkula are presently headed by officers belonging to the IAS cadre however in Panchkula MC, an Indian Railway Personnel Service (IPRS) officer is posted as Commissioner.
“Government shall, by notification in Official Gazette…”
The central issue revolves around the precise language of Section 45(1), which provides that: “The Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint a suitable officer as the Commissioner of the Corporation.”
Hemant argues that the expression “shall”, coupled with the specific requirement of notification in the Official Gazette, makes Gazette publication a mandatory statutory requirement rather than a mere administrative formality.
According to the representation, the State Government has instead generally relied upon posting/transfer orders issued by the Personnel & Training Department, following which officers assume charge as Municipal Commissioners.
The Advocate has questioned whether such departmental posting orders can legally substitute the appointment mechanism expressly prescribed by the Legislature.
A question of statutory appointment—not merely posting
The representation makes a distinction between an officer being posted to a Municipal Corporation and being statutorily appointed as its Commissioner.
It contends that where the Legislature has prescribed a particular mode of appointment, the executive cannot replace that mode with an alternative administrative procedure merely because such a practice has been followed over time.
“If the statutory requirement is mandatory, administrative convenience or established departmental practice cannot override the Act,” is the essence of the legal objection raised.
11 corporations, 11 appointments under scrutiny
The representation identifies the following serving Municipal Commissioners: Yashendra Singh, IAS — Faridabad, Pradeep Dahiya, IAS — Gurugram Mahabir Parsad, IAS — Yamunanagar, Virender Singh Sehrawat, IAS — Ambala, Satyender Duhan, IAS — Rohtak, Saloni Sharma, IAS — Karnal.Pradeep Singh, IAS — Manesar, Jayasharadha, IAS — Hisar. Harshit Kumar, IAS — Sonipat, Pankaj, IAS — Panipat, Vinay Kumar, IRPS — Panchkula. The representation alleges that none of these appointments has, so far as the petitioner has been able to ascertain, been brought into legal effect through the Gazette notification contemplated by Section 45(1).
IAS cadre post argument adds another layer
The representation also raises a separate issue concerning the status of the Municipal Commissioner post under the IAS (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Regulations, 1955, referring to the Haryana cadre strength notification published by the Government of India two months ago on 11 June 2026.
Hemant argues that the post of Municipal Commissioner does not figure as an IAS cadre post in the notified cadre-strength framework and therefore the statutory appointment under the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act assumes particular significance.
He further points out that the 2015 amendment removed the earlier requirement that the Commissioner necessarily be an IAS officer with at least five years’ service and substituted the expression “suitable officer.”
This, according to the representation, potentially permits appointment of a suitably qualified non-IAS officer—but only if the statutory procedure under Section 45(1) is followed.
Could past decisions come under judicial scrutiny?
The representation warns that if the statutory appointment itself is found defective, questions could potentially arise concerning decisions taken by officers while functioning as Commissioners, including administrative, quasi-judicial and financial decisions.
However, the precise legal consequences of non-publication of a Gazette notification would ultimately depend upon judicial interpretation of Section 45(1), including whether the requirement is mandatory or directory and what effect, if any, non-compliance has on acts already performed.
“Rule of Law cannot depend upon administrative practice”
The Advocate has described the matter as one involving “administrative legality, statutory compliance and the Rule of Law”, arguing that the Government itself must strictly comply with legislation enacted by the State Legislature.
The representation claims that the issue has allegedly been brought to the notice of the concerned departments on earlier occasions as well, but that corrective action has not followed.
Four-point demand before Haryana Government
The representation calls upon the Government to: *Examine the legality of the existing appointments of all Municipal Commissioners;, Publish the requisite Section 45(1) Gazette notifications wherever they have not been issued; Ensure that no officer assumes charge as Municipal Commissioner in future without completion of the statutory appointment process; and Issue appropriate directions to all concerned departments to ensure strict compliance with Section 45(1).
The larger question
The controversy ultimately raises a fundamental administrative-law question: Can an executive posting order take the place of a statutory appointment specifically required to be made by notification in the Official Gazette?
That question, if not resolved administratively, could potentially invite judicial examination, particularly if affected parties challenge the authority of a Commissioner on the ground that the statutory appointment procedure was never completed.
For now, the representation has placed the issue before the highest constitutional, political, administrative and legal authorities of Haryana, seeking an immediate examination of the appointment process governing the State’s Municipal Corporations.
The issue is no longer merely who occupies the Commissioner’s chair—it is whether the chair itself has been lawfully filled in the manner mandated by the Legislature, asserted Advocate Hemant Kumar.
Haryana
Trending
