JT 2008(12) SC 331
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.B. SINHA & AFTAB ALAM,. JJ.
Nirmal Singh Kahlon – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and others – Respondents
And
J.P. Singla and others –Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and others – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6198-6199 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 24777 - 24778 of 2005) With CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6200-6201 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 25226 - 25227 of 2005)
Decided on : 22/10/2008
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1) (d)(e) and 13(2) - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 420, 467, 468, 120(B) - Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 - First information report - Post in response to advertisement - Appellant in appeals arising out of SLP (C) was Rural Development and Panchayats Minister in Government of Punjab while three appellants in appeals arising out of SLP (C) were working as Deputy Directors in Department of Rural Development and Panchayats Government of Punjab at relevant time - Two more advertisements were issued first on September for filling up posts and second on October for filling up 800 posts of Panchayat Secretaries respectively - Another advertisement was issued on September inviting applications from the female candidates also for the post of Panchayat Secretaries - In response to the abovementioned advertisements over lacs applications were received processing job whereof was handed over to a Delhi based computer firm. Result of the written test was declared on or about October in which candidates were declared successful - Held, Court do not find any merit in these appeals. We would, however in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of Constitution of India like to issue some directions - In view of fact that a charge sheet has been filed on basis of the first FIR and it is stated that two witnesses had also been examined court would direct the learned Trial Judge to segregate that portion of trial which has any bearing with scam relating to the appointment of Panchayat Secretaries - Appellants in other appeals who had been cited as witnesses therein should not be allowed to be examined except with their consent - Appeal are Dismissed
JUDGMENT S.B. SINHA, J. Leave granted.
1. These two appeals involving similar questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Nirmal Singh Kahlon, Appellant in appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 24777-24778 of 2005 was the Rural Development and Panchayats Minister in the Government of Punjab while the three appellants in appeals arising out of SLP (C)Nos. 25226-25227 of 2005 were working as Deputy Directors in the Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, Government of Punjab at the relevant time.
3. The State of Punjab had enacted the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
4. An advertisement for recruitment of 190 Panchayat Secretaries was issued in the year 1992 for which written test was held in the year 1994 ; however, the posts could not be filled. In the meantime 545 Panchayat Secretaries were appointed on ad hoc basis by the State.
5. One of the applicants, who applied for the post in response to the advertisement of 190 posts, challenged the said ad hoc appointments by way of a writ petition which was marked as C.W.P. No.9835 of 1996, titled Palvinder Singh v. State of Punjab, which was disposed of by a Division Bench of the Court on 20th September, 1996 by directing inter alia the completion of the selection process as well as for available posts with the department. Selection against 190 posts of Panchayat Secretaries, for which written test had already been held was to be finalized on or before 20th November, 1996.
6. Two more advertisements were issued; first on 17/18th September, 1996 for filling up 700 posts and second on 14th October, 1996 for filling up 800 posts of Panchayat Secretaries respectively. Another advertisement was issued on 19th September, 1998 inviting applications from the female candidates also for the post of Panchayat Secretaries. In response to the abovementioned advertisements over 1.5 lacs applications were received, the processing job whereof was handed over to a Delhi based computer firm. Result of the written test was declared on or about 14th October, 2000 in which 3286 candidates were declared successful. They were called for interview. However, no further action appears to have been taken pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof. Another writ petition was filed in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana which was marked as CWP No.11912 of 2000, titled Harmesh Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others. By an order dated 30th August, 2001, selection for the post of Panchayat Secretaries was directed to be completed within one month. The said order was not interfered with by this Court in a Special Leave Petition filed by the State which was marked Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 15843 of 2001 by an order dated 24th September, 2001. Interviews of the eligible candidates were held thereafter and 908 candidates were selected.
7. In or about March, 2002 a change in the State Government took place. The Congress Party came into power after election. The new Government made an attempt to reinstate the Panchayat Patwaris whose services had been terminated by the previous Government pursuant to the orders of the High Court.
8. Selection of the said 908 candidates was the subject matter of another writ petition which was marked as CWP No.5283 of 2003 entitled Veero Devi v. State of Punjab and others. In the said writ petition the Court formed a prima facie opinion that irregularities in the selection process had been committed. By an order dated 3rd April, 2002, the High Court issued the following directions :-
"The Bench Secretary is directed to give copy of this order to learned Deputy Advocate General who shall forward the same to the Advocate General, Punjab. The Advocate General, Punjab shall send the copy of the order to the Chief Secretary, Punjab, who shall ensure that a thorough probe is conducted into the selections made by the Directorate of Department of Rural Development and Panchayats by an officer not belo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.